James K McConnell v. Martha A Doan

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• analogizing the District of Columbia’s failure to set standards for monitoring and selecting Youth Services Administration providers to a successful failure-to- train claim
• equating “moving force” for purposes of a Monell claim as requiring proximate cause, and in turn describing proximate cause as “includ[ing] the notion of cause in fact” and an “element of foreseeability”
• \ 'the proximate cause of an injury is ordinarily a question for the jury.' \
• “Because the District, rather than [his] family, had primary legal control over him, the District had legal responsibility for his daily care.”
• jury could find that District was deliberately indifferent where District “had no criteria for selecting or monitoring [service] providers” as required by District law
• “[W]here the government assumes full responsibility for a child by stripping control from the family and placing the child in a government-controlled setting, the government assumes a duty for the child’s welfare.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).