In Laura I.M. v. Hillside Children's Ctr ., Laura filed a negligence suit against Hillside Children's Center , a treatment facility for emotionally challenged children.
Sergey R., a minor with a history of "pedophilic behavior," voluntarily admitted himself to the Center to address his "sexual issues" so he could control his "sexual impulses." During his stay at the Center , Sergey was listed as a "status 3" client, which meant that he needed supervision at all times, except when bathing, showering, dressing, toileting, or in his room.
Hillside's Social Worker, Wendy Y., repeatedly allowed Sergey to visit his New York City home where he was supposedly being monitored by his mother and older sister. But, in actuality, Sergey's family members were unable to control Sergey's "pedophilic behavior" and, inexplicably, Hillside never addressed or discussed that issue with the Sergey's family at any point in time.
While in the City, Sergey established a friendship with Laura and her family and, since she was unaware of his condition, Sergey was allowed to babysit Laura's two infant children. In April of 1998, upon discovering that Sergey had been sexually abusing her offspring, Laura contacted the authorities and later sued the Center alleging negligent failure to exercise professional judgment.
After discovery, when Laura moved for summary judgment and Hillside cross-moved for the case's dismissal, the New York County Supreme Court found that Laura had established a winning case and denied Hillside's dismissal request. The Appellate Division, First Department, affirmed that outcome on appeal.
The AD1 found that Hillside failed to exercise appropriate professional judgment when it permitted Sergey to make home visits without discussing with his mother whether she had the ability to monitor him. Furthermore, Hillside's failure to take action in response to a letter from Laura that she was "very fond" of Sergey and that she met him "through [her] boys who are now 9-10 and 10-11" and that Sergey "babysat with them extensively," reinforced the Center's negligence and comprised an "independent" basis of liability for the abuse that occurred.
Does that sound like a little shop of horrors , or what?
For a copy of the Appellate Division's decision, please use this link: Laura I.M. v. Hillside Children's Ctr .