29 Jan Throwback Thursday: June 13 2025 Round Up
We are trying something new here at the Round Up! Although we’ve tried to be as consistent as possible, a few Round Ups last year fell through the cracks. So in addition to weekly Friday Round Ups, we hope to bring you a Throwback Thursday every so often with some more interesting cases that just didn’t quite get posted last year.
Crackdown on Cabinet Continues
Just one case from the week of June 13, 2025, so we’ve tried to give it its due with a close read. This Round Up pairs well with our post about SB 26, as both highlight how all three branches of our government are scrutinizing the Cabinet for Health and Family Services in its role in family law cases.
S.H. v. Cabinet for Health & Family Services, 2024-CA-0617
A rare CAPTA reversal—this one matters.
Every so often, a published opinion stands out not just for what it holds, but for who it protects. The Court of Appeals’ decision in S.H. v. Cabinet for Health and Family Services is a significant win for due process, and a warning shot to the Cabinet: accidents are not neglect, and substantiations demand evidence.
S.H., a school counselor and mother of three (two of whom have significant medical needs), left her children at home in 2018 with her adult brother for a quick trip to the store while everyone had the flu. During that short window, her toddler ingested medication accidentally left out by the uncle after a family sleepover. It was a scary, near-fatal accident, and the Cabinet opened a case.
Despite:
- A joint stipulation that the uncle, not the mother, left the medication accessible,
- The fact that the uncle was not substantiated for neglect,
- A record showing the medication was normally kept in a lockbox, and
- No suggestion that the mother had any reason to doubt the uncle’s competence,
… the Cabinet substantiated the allegation only against the mother and placed her on the central Child Abuse/Neglect Registry.
She appealed through the CAPTA process, was denied relief by the hearing officer and Secretary, and then appealed again in circuit court.
The Court of Appeals reversed. And hard.
The appellate court found the Cabinet failed to carry its burden of proving that S.H. “created or allowed to be created a risk of physical injury by other than accidental means” under KRS 600.020(1)(a)2. It held:
- The evidence supported an accident, not neglect.
- The Cabinet’s finding relied on burden-shifting and deference that should not have applied.
- S.H.’s actions—calling 911 immediately, using a lockbox, and choosing an adult caregiver—showed caution, not carelessness.
- The Cabinet’s standard would effectively create strict liability for parents, contrary to Kentucky law.
As the panel emphasized, “Not all injuries correlate to and/or mandate a finding of neglect.” Citing Baker, 613 S.W.3d 1, they reminded us that bad outcomes don’t always mean bad parenting.
This is a rare published reversal of a Child Protective Services (CPS) substantiation. These appeals are often uphill battles. Practitioners are aware that findings can follow a parent for life, both professionally and personally. This one ended up in the central registry, jeopardizing the career of a licensed social worker.
Notably, the Court refused to allow the Cabinet to redefine “accidental means” or shift the burden of proof onto parents to prove their innocence. It reasserted the judiciary’s role in interpreting KRS 600.020 and pushed back on administrative overreach.
And let’s be clear: this opinion pulls no punches. The panel openly critiques the Cabinet’s reliance on a decades-old event when S.H. was herself a teenager and a rape survivor. That rhetorical overreach didn’t sit well with the Court, and practitioners should take note when considering how old incidents are deployed in modern substantiations.
This is a case to bookmark, quote, and cite. It reestablishes that CAPTA findings must be grounded in real, probative evidence, rather than assumptions, poor optics, or unfortunate outcomes. An excellent result for the client. Stellar advocacy by Todd Lewis on behalf of the appellant. Hats off, counselor.
Published. http://opinions.kycourts.net/COA/2024-CA-000617.PDF
Criminal Tally
The weekly criminal tally was Cops 5, Robbers 0.
A notable criminal case involved a Fayette County Circuit Judge who found that a defendant in a murder trial was entitled to a new trial due to prosecutorial misconduct. The Court of Appeals reversed and let the murder conviction stand. http://opinions.kycourts.net/COA/2024-CA-000836.PDF
Thanks for reading! Click here for the most recent Round Up.