In Hyde v. City of Willcox, published January 6, 2022, the 9th Circuit affirmed in part and reversed in part a district court's denial of a motion to dismiss an action brought under 42 U.S.C. section 1983. The plaintiffs' complaint alleged that decedent had mental health issues managed through medications. He was arrested on suspicion of driving under the influence. While detained, he did not receive his prescribed medication. After several hours, he became restless and charged around the booking area and female cell area, falling once and injuring himself. The officers tased and struck the decedent multiple times, as they restrained him with handcuffs and leg irons and placed him in a restraint chair. The decedent stopped breathing. The officers were unable to revive him. He died in the hospital the next day. Causes of death included blunt force injuries, kidney damage caused by muscle breakdown, enlarged heart, and coronary artery atherosclerosis. The decedent's parents sued the officers for use of excessive force, the municipal and supervisory defendants for failure to train, and all defendants for violating substantive due process and equal protection. The defendants moved to dismiss on the grounds that the individual officers were entitled to qualified immunity and the plaintiffs had failed to plausibly plead a case for Monell liability. The defendants appealed the denial of qualified immunity, and asked the 9th Circuit to exercise pendant appellate jurisdiction over the Monell claim.
The 9th Circuit ruled that the complaint plausibly alleged that two of the officers violated the decedent's clearly-established constitutional rights. Until the decedent was subdued and restrained, the officers' uses of tasers, blows, and restraints were reasonable. Although the plaintiffs alleged that use of force against a mentally ill person was unreasonable, the complaint did not plausibly allege that the officers knew of the decedent's mental conditions or his prescriptions. Instead, the complaint alleged that the decedent was calm and cooperative until he began running around and injuring himself. But two officers' use of a taser and a restraint hold after the decedent was subdued and restrained was unreasonable. Although the complaint was less than clear about the decedent's actions, and the parties did not include the jail video in the record, the court construed the complaint in favor of the plaintiffs. Ninth Circuit case law clearly establishes use of intermediate force, such as a head restraint or taser, on a restrained and non-resisting suspect is unreasonable. It also makes clear that officers must reassess use of force in an evolving situation as circumstances change. The two officers allegedly had two minutes to realize the decedent, who was handcuffed, shackled, and exhausted, could no longer resist and did not pose a threat. The court therefore affirmed the denial of qualified immunity to those officers. But the panel reversed the ruling that the complaint plausibly alleged denial of medical care by denying him access to his medication and by not providing him medical care after the altercation. The complaint did not plausibly allege that the named defendants played any role in denying the decedent his medication. It also did not plausibly allege that the defendant officers knew the decedent was in medical distress after the melee. Qualified immunity thus barred the claim. The supervisor defendants were entitled to qualified immunity for the failure to train claim. The plaintiffs did not allege any basis for the claim other than this single incident, which is inadequate to make out a claim for failure to train. Because the municipalities' Monell liability was intertwined with the supervisors' liability (since the complaint relied on the same facts in alleging failure to train against the supervisors and municipalities), the court had jurisdiction to entertain the challenge to the failure to dismiss the Monell claim, and reversed it.
Comments