Waterbury, Conn. – On Monday, Claims Commissioner Robert Shea, Jr. ruled that the legal team representing a man who says he was held captive by his stepmother for decades may examine selected sections of an internal Department of Children and Families (DCF) review. The decision comes as the state agency fights to keep much of the document sealed under a broad confidentiality law.
Background of the claim
The alleged victim, who now identifies only as “S,” filed a lawsuit against the state in 2026, alleging that DCF failed to act on numerous reports of abuse dating back to the mid‑1990s. According to court filings, school officials repeatedly alerted DCF while S was an elementary‑school student, but the agency did not remove him from his home.
Police allege that S was confined in a locked room by his stepmother, Kimberly Sullivan, for more than twenty years. Sullivan has pleaded not guilty to kidnapping and assault charges.
Legal arguments
Assistant Attorney General John Tucker, representing the state, urged the commission to dismiss the claim, arguing that it falls outside Connecticut’s three‑year statute of limitations for such actions. DCF’s last contact with S and his family was in 2005, and the lawsuit was filed in 2026.
Victim’s attorneys Joel Faxon and Brittany Cates counter that the limitation clock should not begin until S was no longer being held captive, a point they hope the internal DCF review will help clarify. “Our claim is based effectively on the public statement of DCF,” Faxon said. “We’ve been provided virtually nothing in this case.”
Disclosure dispute
The internal review, produced in 2025 after a public‑records request by Connecticut Public, examines how DCF handled S’s case. Tucker argued the entire document must remain confidential, while Shea determined that the parties should negotiate which portions can be shared under seal.
Shea emphasized the importance of the document, stating, “Everyone knows about this document. It’s got to be looked at.” He directed the attorneys to reach an agreement on protected sections and those that can be disclosed.
Potential impact
If the court permits the victim’s lawyers to review the report, it could influence whether the statute‑of‑limitations argument holds merit. The case also raises broader questions about DCF’s accountability and the state’s duty to protect children when multiple warnings are reported.
Both sides indicated they want the dispute resolved quickly so the commission can decide whether it has jurisdiction to hear the claim.
Original reporting: The Connecticut Mirror — read the source article.
