SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(US)(ca7) 33

COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT
Scudder
Erika Mabes – Appellant
Versus
Angela McFeeley – Respondent



United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit ____________________ Nos. 24-1048 and 24-1082 ERIKA MABES and BRIAN MABES, individually and on behalf of L.M., J.R.M., and J.A.M., minor children, Plaintiffs-Appellees,

v. SHANNON THOMPSON, et al., Defendants-Appellants. ____________________

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division. No. 1:21-cv-02062-JRS-MKK — James R. Sweeney II, Judge. ____________________

ARGUED DECEMBER 12, 2024 — DECIDED APRIL 28, 2025 ____________________

Before RIPPLE, SCUDDER, and MALDONADO, Circuit Judges. SCUDDER, Circuit Judge. This case arose out of tragic cir- cumstances. In July 2019 Indiana Department of Child Ser- vices workers encountered a two-month-old infant with a se- vere skull fracture and extensive brain damage after being taken to an emergency room by his parents who had discov- ered him unresponsive and struggling to breathe. And so be- gan lengthy child abuse and custody proceedings against the 2 Nos. 24-1048 & 24-1082 parents of the child, Erika and Brian Mabes. The Mabeses ul- timately regained custody of the infant and their other two children and sued nine Indiana DCS workers and a consultant doctor at the hospital, invoking 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and alleging violations of their Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights under the Constitution. The district court denied the defendants’ motions for sum- mary judgment because it found that unresolved factual dis- putes precluded their requests for qualified immunity. The defendants now appeal. After conducting our own review of the factual record and evaluating each defendant and claim individually, as the law of qualified immunity demands, we reverse. I A Because this appeal comes to us from the district court’s denial of qualified immunity, we accept the plaintiffs’ version of the facts as true. See Smith v. Finkley, 10 F.4th 725, 735–36 (7th Cir. 2021). Shortly after midnight on July 20, 2019, Brian Mabes dozed off while watching his two-month-old twin sons. He awoke to find one of the twins, L.M., struggling to breathe and unresponsive. L.M. had been fussy that night, so to ease the infant’s discomfort, Brian placed him on his stomach on a soft memory-foam mattress—an unsafe sleeping arrange- ment, all parties seem to agree. After waiting to see if L.M.’s condition would improve, Brian woke up his wife Erika, a fellow at Indiana University training to become a pediatric plastic surgeon. The couple called 911 and emergency responders transported L.M. to a Nos. 24-1048 & 24-1082 3 nearby regional hospital. Shortly after his arrival, L.M. began vomiting and aspirating. The doctors administered CPR and attempted to intubate L.M. multiple times. According to the Mabeses, L.M. was without oxygen for at least 12 minutes. After stabilizing L.M., the medical team arranged a lifeline transfer by helicopter to Riley Hospital for Children, a spe- cialty hospital in Indianapolis. A CT scan taken upon L.M.’s arrival showed extensive brain damage in addition to a sig- nificant Y-shaped fracture on his skull. Doctors also observed abdominal bruising. Although the Riley team managed to sta- bilize the infant, L.M. remained in critical condition with a grave prognosis. The Riley doctors reported L.M.’s condition to the Indiana Department of Child Services, which enlisted Dr. Shannon Thompson, a member of Indiana University School of Medi- cine’s child protection program division, as a consultant. In her role as a DCS consultant, Dr. Thompson had the ability to order tests and con

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top