Summary
The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the denial of a preliminary injunction sought by iCare Child Development Center LLC and Lauren Davis after the Georgia Department of Early Care and Learning dismissed iCare from the state childcare voucher program. Assuming without deciding that iCare had a property interest in continued participation, the court held under the Mathews v. Eldridge balancing test that iCare was not entitled to a pre-deprivation hearing before dismissal for failing to provide records during an onsite investigation. The court concluded that iCare therefore was not entitled to preliminary-injunctive reinstatement.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether iCare was entitled to a preliminary injunction reinstating it in Georgia's childcare voucher program.
- Whether due process required the Department to provide iCare with a pre-deprivation hearing before dismissing it from the voucher program for failing to comply with an onsite investigation.
Holdings
- iCare was not entitled to a preliminary injunction because it could not establish a substantial likelihood of success on its due-process claim.
- Assuming without deciding that iCare had a property interest in continued participation in the voucher program, the Due Process Clause did not require a pre-deprivation hearing before dismissal for failure to comply with an onsite investigation.
Key quotations
“Failure to show any of the four factors is fatal.” (7)
“On balance, the Mathews factors weigh against requiring a pre-deprivation hearing.” (12)
“Because iCare is not entitled to a pre-deprivation hearing, it is not entitled to its requested preliminary injunction.” (12)
Factual background
The Georgia Department of Early Care and Learning conducted simultaneous onsite reviews at four iCare childcare centers and requested arrival and departure records required by iCare's provider agreement. Three centers could not compile all requested records during the audits, and the Department subsequently dismissed all iCare centers from the Childcare and Parent Services voucher program for failing to cooperate with an onsite investigation. iCare contended that the audits were retaliatory and sought additional time and an appeal, but the Department treated the dismissal as final and unappealable. Although dismissal substantially reduced iCare's revenue, iCare continued to operate three daycares and could serve non-program beneficiaries.
Procedural history
The Georgia Department of Early Care and Learning dismissed iCare's childcare centers from the voucher program after three of four audited centers failed to produce all requested arrival and departure records during onsite investigations. iCare sued Department officials under the Fourteenth Amendment and 42 U.S.C. § 1983, among other claims, and sought a preliminary injunction requiring reinstatement. The United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia denied the injunction, concluding that iCare was unlikely to succeed on its due-process claim and that the public-interest and balance-of-harms factors favored the Department. The Eleventh Circuit affirmed.