- Court: Oregon Supreme Court
- Area(s) of Law: Administrative Law
- Date Filed: 06-16-2022
- Case #: S068395
- Judge(s)/Court Below: Balmer, J. for the Court; Walter, C.J.; Flynn, J.; Duncan, J.; Nelson, J.; Garrett, J.; & DeHoog, J.
- Full Text Opinion
Plaintiff appealed a determination by Defendant that reported Plaintiff had abused children were “founded.” Plaintiff assigned error to the use of the “reasonable cause” standard of review to determine whether a report of abuse is “founded.” On appeal, Plaintiff argued that the legislature intended the higher standard of “probable cause” because the consequences of a “founded” report of abuse could be severe. In response, Defendant argued that a “reasonable suspicion” was more appropriate. “ ‘Reasonable cause’ is a subjectively and objectively reasonable belief, given all of the circumstances and based on specific and articulable facts.” OAR 413-015-0115(58). The Court reasoned that there was no statute or other regulation that would prohibit Defendant from using the “reasonable cause” standard and that the impacts of a “founded” determination of abuse would not be as severe as what the Plaintiff argued. Affirmed.