## Facts

- In 2006, law enforcement in Springdale, Arkansas and Washington County investigated allegations that an adult male had sexually abused several minor siblings years earlier.
- Officers interviewed four minor sisters and other family members and allegedly promised the sisters their statements would remain confidential.
- Investigators created written reports documenting the allegations and interview information.
- In 2015, a media outlet submitted Arkansas FOIA requests seeking the 2006 investigation reports.
- The Springdale police chief and city attorney authorized release of the city report, and a county official ordered release of the county report.
- Although some information was redacted, the released reports allegedly contained enough identifying details (including family and household information) to enable the public to determine the minors’ identities as the victims.
- Media publication based on the released reports allegedly caused severe publicity and related harms.
- The plaintiffs alleged Arkansas confidentiality law barred disclosure of child-abuse investigation information and exempted it from FOIA disclosure.

## Issues

1. Whether the complaint plausibly alleged a violation of a clearly established federal constitutional right to informational privacy sufficient to defeat qualified immunity at the motion-to-dismiss stage.
2. Whether Arkansas statutory immunity or common-law qualified immunity required dismissal of the state-law tort claims at the pleading stage.

## Decision

- The Eighth Circuit affirmed the denial of the officials’ motion to dismiss on interlocutory appeal.
- The court held the plaintiffs plausibly alleged that releasing highly sensitive information about childhood sexual abuse, obtained under promises of confidentiality, violated informational-privacy protections and was sufficiently clearly established to preclude qualified immunity at the pleading stage.
- The court also held dismissal of the Arkansas tort claims on immunity grounds was improper because the allegations permitted an inference of malice or knowing violation of confidentiality limits, making immunity fact-dependent and unsuitable for resolution on a Rule 12(b)(6) record.
- The case was remanded for further proceedings with the federal and state claims continuing against the officials.

## Legal Principles

- On a motion to dismiss, courts accept well-pleaded allegations as true and draw reasonable inferences in favor of the plaintiff when evaluating qualified immunity and plausibility.
- A limited constitutional interest in informational privacy may apply to disclosure of exceptionally sensitive personal information, including sexual-abuse information concerning minors, particularly where confidentiality is promised and supported by law.
- Qualified immunity may be denied at the pleading stage when the alleged conduct plausibly violates a constitutional right that was sufficiently clear in the specific context alleged.
- Under Arkansas official-immunity doctrines, immunity generally depends on whether officials acted within the scope of employment and without malice; allegations of knowing illegality or improper motive can preclude dismissal before factual development.

## Conclusion

The Eighth Circuit allowed claims to proceed past the pleading stage against city and county officials who allegedly released poorly redacted child-sexual-abuse investigation reports that effectively identified minor victims, holding that qualified immunity and Arkansas immunity defenses could not justify dismissal on the complaint’s allegations.


Dillard v. City of Springdale, 930 F.3d 935 (8th Cir. 2019)