Van Zee v. Hanson

630 F.3d 1126 (8th Cir. 2011)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

P enlisted in the Army. P then executed two blank release forms: one for law enforcement records, the other for a probation officer and court records. The Army recruiter sent these forms to law enforcement and court agencies where P had resided, including to the Court Services Office of the Sixth Judicial District of South Dakota. The Chief Court Services Officer responded on July 2 that under South Dakota Law, Van Zee's juvenile records could not be disclosed. On July 9, the recruiter contacted D, Clerk of Courts for Hyde County, South Dakota, requesting P's juvenile records. After D disclosed P's juvenile records, the recruiter notified him that his enlistment was canceled. P sued D under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that she violated his Fourteenth Amendment rights by disclosing his juvenile records to an Army recruiter. D moved to dismiss. The court ruled that P did not state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 because D's actions did not violate his right of privacy. P appealed.