The following excerpt is from Akey v. Placer Cnty., No. 2:14-cv-02402-KJM-KJN (E.D. Cal. 2015):
lawful). In Rogers, 487 F.3d at 1297, however, the court reversed a finding of qualified immunity "because a reasonable social worker would have understood that the children faced no imminent risk of serious bodily harm, as required by clearly established law." In that case, the court found no exigency despite the evident malnourishment and disorderly conditions in the home because the social worker conceded she could have obtained a warrant within hours, and there was no risk of a worsening of physical conditions in that short time. Id. at 1295. In Anderson-Francois v. Cnty. of Sonoma, 415 F. App'x 6, 9 (9th Cir. 2011), the court affirmed a denial of qualified immunity where an officer "could have obtained a warrant within a few hours, [and] did not have reasonable cause to believe that the children were in imminent danger."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.