# California State Foster Parent Ass'n v. Wagner

> Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · August 30, 2010 · 624 F.3d 974

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8411785

## Case

- **Full name:** CALIFORNIA STATE FOSTER PARENT ASSOCIATION California State Care Providers Association Legal Advocates for Permanent Parenting v. John WAGNER, Director of the California Department of Social Services, in his official capacity Mary Ault, Deputy Director of the Children and Family Services Division of the California Department of Social Services, in her official capacity
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
- **Decided:** August 30, 2010
- **Citations:** 624 F.3d 974; 2010 WL 4227866
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Callahan
- **Judges:** Callahan, Lucero, Schroeder
- **Cited by:** 24 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8411785

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that the court may "give deference to a reasonable methodology employed by the State" for calculating costs, and that, even with such deference, "the absence of a uniform federal methodology for setting rates 'does not render the [statute] unenforceable by a court' " (…
- holding that 15 the court may “give deference to a reasonable methodology employed by the 16 State” for calculating costs, and that, even with such deference, “the absence of a 17 uniform federal methodology for setting rates ‘does not render the [statute] 18 unenforceable by …
- holding that foster parents may bring a § 1983 claim to enforce the right “to foster care maintenance payments from the State that cover the cost of the expenses enumerated in § 675(4)(A)”

## Opinion text

CALLAHAN, Circuit Judge,
concurring:
I concur because I agree that the application to this case of the three-part test set forth by the Supreme Court in Blessing v. Freestone, 520 U.S. 329, 340-41 , 117 S.Ct. 1353 , 137 L.Ed.2d 569 (1997), is controlled by our opinion in Price v. City of Stockton, 390 F.3d 1105 (9th Cir.2004). Were I writing on a blank slate, I would not find that there is the requisite “unambiguously conferred right” for a private action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 . See Gonzaga University v. Doe, 536 U.S. 273, 283 , 122 S.Ct. 2268 , 153 L.Ed.2d 309 (2002).

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8411785. Public record. Not legal advice.