Share Email 85 Shares

BENNINGTON — The owner of a defunct day care facility alleges that actions by a Vermont state trooper and three Department for Children and Families employees forced her out of business and caused her significant emotional distress.

Debi Miller, of Pownal, has sued those four and the state itself in federal court over a criminal citation that accused her of reckless endangerment of a child and the suspension of her license to operate a day care — both of which were later overturned in separate decisions.

Get all of VTDigger's daily news. You'll never miss a story with our daily headlines in your inbox.

The action stems from a May 13, 2016, incident at a North Bennington day care Miller owned. A 1-year-old child had to be taken to Southwestern Vermont Medical Center, where it was determined the girl had a potentially fatal condition that was affecting her breathing.

The child was flown to Albany (N.Y.) Medical Center for further treatment, and recovered.

Miller owned and operated a licensed business called Dooda’s Daycare that served 30 children enrolled full time and 12 part time, while employing eight workers, according to the lawsuit. She said the actions of the state employees effectively put her out of business and caused her “extreme emotional stress.”

The suit was filed May 18 in U.S. District Court on behalf of Miller by attorney Devin McLaughlin, of Langrock, Sperry & Wool, of Middlebury. The defendants are Vermont State Police Officer Robert Zink; DCF employees Christopher Murphy, Elaine Crawford and Stacey Edmunds-Brickell; and the state as their employer.

Miller is alleging “false arrest and malicious prosecution” by Zink in seeking criminal charges, which the suit says was undertaken “without probable cause, and which deprived her of her liberty and right to operate a licensed day care business.”

She alleges the DCF workers also acted without probable cause and conducted a “malicious prosecution of Mrs. Miller.”

VTDigger is underwritten by:

After suspending her day care license after Miller was issued the criminal citation, DCF briefly reinstated the license after the charge was dismissed in Superior Court in June for lack of probable cause. But DCF notified Miller that she was still under investigation by the department, according to the suit.

Miller said she was notified in mid-July that “DCF had decided to substantiate her as a child abuser,” stating that on May 13, 2016, she had abused the 1-year-old girl by placing her at risk of harm. The DCF decision barred her from operating a day care until it was overturned in February.

The actions of the defendants “put her out of the day care business — her chosen profession for many years and her primary source of income,” the suit alleges.

McLaughlin said Tuesday that “this was pretty devastating to her, not only concerning the money.”

Deputy Attorney General Joshua Diamond said Tuesday that the AG’s office, which is expected to defend the case, has not yet been formally served with the complaint but was provided a copy, which is now under review.

Miller contested the July abuse substantiation decision by DCF, according to the suit, “and its expressed intention to place her on the Child Abuse Registry.”

But on Feb. 6 a reviewer “rejected DCF’s substantiation decision, finding that the evidence did not meet the current legal and policy standards for substantiation, meaning no reasonable person would believe that Mrs. Miller abused the child,” the suit states.

In Superior Court on June 17, Judge David Howard had dismissed the state trooper’s complaint as lacking probable cause. He said in part that Miller and an employee, Kristie Clough, of Eagle Bridge, New York, who faced a similar criminal complaint that was also dismissed, began to react within 10 to 15 minutes to lethargy in the child.

“The child arrived with no notice of any problem,” the judge stated. “Father (who dropped her off at the day care) noticed nothing apparently to rise to the level of thinking he had to mention it to the staff. The child then appears to sleep for 10-15 minutes and Ms. Miller and Ms. Clough realize this is unusual and react to it.”

He added, “(Miller and Clough) take measures to help the child while phone calls are made, including using a washcloth and taking the child’s shirt and perhaps even trying to take its temperature. These are not neglectful actions or ill treatment.”

The suit also says state police issued a news release about the criminal citations, which was reported by news organizations and shared on Facebook. In that release, police said Miller and Clough had noticed the child was not alert after letting her sleep for a while. It was then “a considerable amount of time” before they called the child’s mother, and several minutes passed before they contacted 911, the release said.

The suit alleges the publicity resulted in another significant and negative impact on Miller’s business.

At SVMC it was determined the child was suffering from respiratory syncytial virus.

The arresting officer and the DCF officials both initiated action against Miller that “was outrageous, was undertaken intentionally or with reckless disregard of the probability of causing emotional distress, and (their) outrageous conduct was the actual or proximate cause of Mrs. Miller’s extreme emotional distress,” the suit alleges.

VTDigger is underwritten by:

The suit seeks unspecified compensatory damages, as well as punitive damages, stating the defendants’ actions “were committed willfully, wantonly and maliciously, and were motivated by evil motive or intent, and were recklessly and/or callously and/or deliberately indifferent to Mrs. Miller’s rights under the United States Constitution.”

Share Email 85 Shares