In re N.D.

Syllabus

The petitioner, the Department of Children, Youth, and Families (DCYF), appealed an order of the Family Court finding it in contempt of an order to place the child, N.D., in a residential facility that is appropriate for her level of need. DCYF argued that it could not be held in contempt because it was unable to comply with the Family Court order, and it asserted that the Family Court improperly rejected its inability defense. The Family Court reasoned that DCYF was able to comply because it had demonstrated its ability to develop an appropriate residential facility for boys therefore, it should not have been able to claim an inability to develop one for girls, like N.D. The Family Court further reasoned that that DCYF could not rely upon its inability to provide N.D. with an appropriate residential facility when it had a statutory obligation to do so. The Supreme Court vacated the Family Court's finding of contempt because, although DCYF has a statutory obligation to provide facilities for children under its care, the issue of whether DCYF had complied with its statutory obligations was not before the hearing justice. Instead, the issue was whether DCYF was literally able to comply with the Family Court's order as of the contempt hearing date. DCYF demonstrated that it was unable to comply because, despite DCYF's reasonable efforts to find a placement, facility staffing concerns, low discharge rates, and an increase in mental-health issues among adolescents during the COVID-19 pandemic created a \perfect storm\ for reduced capacity at all appropriate facilities.