Mark G. v. Rosetti, 9 N.Y.3d 305 (2007)

A private right of action for monetary damages based on violation of a state statute will not be implied if it is inconsistent with the legislative scheme, particularly where the legislature has provided alternative enforcement mechanisms.

Summary

Eleven children (and the estate of a twelfth) sued New York City child welfare officials, alleging abuse or neglect while dependent on the child welfare system. The plaintiffs sought monetary damages under Title 4 and Title 6 of Article 6 of the Social Services Law. The New York Court of Appeals held that no private right of action exists under either title. For Title 4, the legislative scheme focused on funding incentives and penalties for non-compliance, making a private right inconsistent. For Title 6, the legislature specifically created a private right in one section (§420) but not others, indicating no intent to create broader liability. The Court also dismissed due process claims, but allowed the plaintiffs to replead their substantive due process and common-law negligence claims.

Facts

Plaintiffs, dependent children in the New York City child welfare system, alleged they suffered abuse or neglect in their homes or foster homes. They claimed violations of Social Services Law, seeking monetary damages. The initial action was a proposed class action, but class certification was withdrawn.

Procedural History

The plaintiffs sued, asserting multiple causes of action. The defendants moved for summary judgment, which the courts treated as motions to dismiss for failure to state a cause of action. The Appellate Division dismissed the claims. The Court of Appeals reviewed the dismissal, focusing on the existence of a private right of action and due process claims.

Issue(s)

1. Whether a private right of action for money damages exists for violations of Title 4 of Article 6 of the Social Services Law (