Dillard v. Hoyt, No. 17-3284 (8th Cir. 2020)
Annotate this CaseThe Eighth Circuit granted defendants' petition for rehearing en banc of the panel's qualified immunity ruling. In this case, plaintiffs filed a 42 U.S.C. 1983 action against the City, the County, and officials, alleging violations of their constitutional right to privacy and of Arkansas tort law in connection with defendants' decisions to release information identifying them as victims of childhood sexual abuse. Plaintiffs are sisters and stars of the popular reality show 19 Kids and Counting. Plaintiffs were interviewed along with others as part of a police investigation into sexual misconduct by plaintiffs' brother. Reviewing de novo, the court reversed the denial of qualified immunity and held that the asserted due process right to informational privacy was not clearly established at the time. The court reinstated the remainder of the court's opinion.
Court Description: [Loken, Author for the Court En Banc, joined by Colloton, Gruender, Benton, Erickson, Stras and Kobes.] Civil case - Civil Rights. Plaintiffs alleged the individual defendants violated plaintiffs' Fourteenth Amendment rights to informational privacy by disclosing redacted investigatory reports to the media in response to Arkansas FOIA requests. The individual defendants moved to dismiss the Section 1983 damage claims based on qualified immunity. Held, the district court erred in denying defendants' motion to dismiss because the due process right to informational privacy asserted by plaintiffs was not clearly established at the time of defendants' actions. The remainder of the panel's opinion is reinstated. Judge Colloton, concurring. Judge Grasz, with whom Chief Judge Smith joins, concurring in part and concurring in the result. Judge Kelly, concurring in part and dissenting in part.
This opinion or order relates to an opinion or order originally issued on July 12, 2019.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.