Holloway v. Brush

Sammye Holloway (plaintiff) lost contact with her two young children in November 1988 when her husband disappeared with the children. Holloway spent the next four years making numerous attempts to locate her children. In 1990, the children and their father were living out of a car in Ohio. Local authorities became aware of the situation, and the children were placed in the temporary custody of the Clermont County Department of Human Services (CCDHS) (defendant). During that time, CCDHS unsuccessfully attempted to notify Holloway that her children were in the state’s custody with notice ultimately being published pursuant to court approval. In March 1992, Sally Brush (defendant) was the caseworker assigned to Holloway’s children’s case. In May 1993, Brush received a letter from Holloway asking for information about her children. At the time, the case plan created by Brush was for CCDHS to request permanent custody of the children from the court. Thus, Brush lied to Holloway and stated that her rights had already been terminated. In June 1993, a family court awarded permanent custody of the children to CCDHS, with Brush making no mention of her communications with Holloway. Ultimately, Holloway never regained custody, and her children were adopted. She filed suit against numerous defendants, including Brush, under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of Brush on the grounds of absolute immunity. Holloway appealed.