Editorial
Front Page - Friday, November 06, 2009
Eighth Circuit Recent Decisions
Krout v. Sawdy, et al., No 08-2781 (8th Cir. October 6, 2009)
In this case, an Eighth Circuit panel heard an appeal from a denial of summary judgment by the Eastern District of Arkansas. The case involves a Section 1983 lawsuit filed by the estate of Bobby Joe Rylee, who died after being beaten by Russellville police during an arrest and being held in the Pope County Detention Center. The complaint alleged the use of excessive force by the police officers in violation of Rylee’s Fourth Amendment rights. Additionally, the complaint alleged the detention center failed to provide him with adequate medical assistance in violation of Rylee’s due process rights. The suit was brought against five Russellville police officers and four correctional officers, all of whom moved for summary judgement based on qualified immunity. The motion was denied, and all defendants appealed the decision.
First, the Court determined it did not have jurisdiction to review the denial of summary judgment as to two of the police officers. The Court reached this decision because the issue raised on appeal related to whether these two defendants caused the death of Rylee. Based on case law, the Court concluded it has no jurisdiction to review causation issues on an appeal of a denial of summary judgment based on qualified immunity.
The Eighth Circuit also affirmed the denial of summary judgment as to the other three police officers. These officers argued there was no evidence that they used force against Rylee. However, the Court decided a jury could conclude that these officers violated Rylee’s Fourth Amendment rights by failing to thwart the unnecessary use of force by the other officers. Therefore, these officers were denied qualified immunity.
Finally, the Eighth Circuit reversed the denial of summary judgment with respect to the four correctional officers. Essentially, in order to lose their qualified immunity, the officers must have acted with “deliberate indifference to a substantial risk of physical harm.” Such indifference to a detainee’s serious medical needs constitutes a violation of due process under the Fourteenth Amendment. Deliberate indifference requires that the officers recognized a substantial risk of harm and consciously disregarded it, knowing such behavior was wrong in light of the risk. The deliberate indifference standard exceeds gross negligence, and the conduct of the four officers did not reach the requisite level. The officers kept close watch on Rylee and offered him medical assistance that he refused. After Rylee refused medical assistance, the officers called emergency medical technicians. The emergency medical technicians concluded that nothing was seriously wrong with Rylee, and the officers relied on that conclusion. Given these fats, the officers might have been negligent, but negligence does not rise to the level of deliberate indifference. Accordingly, the four officers were entitled to qualified immunity, and the district court erred in denying their motions for summary judgment.
These summaries are provided as a service to the bar by the attorneys of Wright, Lindsey &
Jennings LLP, Little Rock and Rogers, Ark.
Share
|