McGrew v. State, Department of Health & Social Services, Division of Family & Youth Services

Summary

The Alaska Supreme Court reviewed the dismissal under Alaska Civil Rule 12(b)(6) of grandparents' claims against the Division of Family and Youth Services arising from child-in-need-of-aid and adoption proceedings. The court affirmed dismissal of the negligence and constitutional claims, holding that DFYS owed no actionable duty to the grandparents and that alternative judicial remedies were available. It reversed dismissal of the intentional infliction of emotional distress claim because the complaint adequately pleaded the required elements.

Holdings

1. DFYS did not owe the McGrews an actionable duty of reasonable care in connection with the CINA proceeding. Alaska Statute 47.10.960 precluded reliance on Title 47 provisions as the source of a tort duty, and Karen L. controlled the negligence issue.
2. The McGrews could not pursue a Bivens-type tort remedy because they had adequate alternative judicial remedies in the CINA and adoption proceedings; the court therefore did not need to recognize a Bivens remedy under the Alaska Constitution.
3. The complaint adequately pleaded an IIED claim and should not have been dismissed under Rule 12(b)(6).
4. The court did not need to decide whether the superior court erred in denying supplementation of the record.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the complaint stated a negligence claim based on DFYS's alleged failure to follow statutory requirements, regulations, and internal policies in placing the child.
2. Whether the McGrews could pursue a Bivens-type damages remedy for alleged violations of the Alaska Constitution when they had judicial remedies available in the CINA and adoption proceedings.
3. Whether the McGrews adequately pleaded an intentional infliction of emotional distress claim.
4. Whether the superior court erred in denying the McGrews' motion to supplement the record.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded