656 F. App'x 54
6th Cir.2016Background
- Steven Broughton, serving a 60-day sentence in Warren County Jail, had a long history of suicide attempts and psychiatric issues but repeatedly told jail medical staff he was "not thinking about" suicide.
- In 2009 he was placed on suicide watch after reporting suicidal ideation; subsequent short incarcerations were uneventful. In June 2011 he was booked again, screened by jail medical staff, and reported prior psychiatric disorders and recent overdose but denied current suicidal intent.
- Broughton withheld that he had attempted suicide by overdose nine days before arrest because he did not want to be placed on suicide watch; staff provided most medications but withheld Ambien due to admitted abuse.
- Admitted to general population, Broughton was later placed in disciplinary segregation after a cellmate dispute; about 1.5 days later he attempted suicide by hanging, was discovered by officers, cut down, resuscitated, and survived.
- Broughton sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Warren County, Premier Health Care Services, and individual medical/corrections staff alleging Eighth/Fourteenth Amendment deliberate indifference; district court granted summary judgment for defendants.
- The Sixth Circuit affirmed, concluding no reasonable jury could find the defendants were subjectively aware of and recklessly disregarded a substantial risk of suicide.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether defendants were deliberately indifferent to a substantial suicide risk | Broughton says objective risk (suicidal history, recent overdose, withdrawal, lack of Ambien) and circumstantial evidence show defendants knew of and disregarded risk | Defendants say medical screens, treatment of withdrawal, absence of expressed suicidal ideation, and withheld Ambien for abuse show no subjective knowledge of imminent risk | Held: No deliberate indifference; no evidence defendants subjectively perceived and disregarded a strong likelihood of suicide |
| Whether failure to follow written screening/suicide protocols establishes constitutional liability | Broughton argues protocol violations show deliberate indifference | Defendants argue improper screening does not alone create constitutional liability | Held: Protocol noncompliance insufficient; no established constitutional right to perfect implementation of suicide protocols |
| Whether municipal/contractor liability exists for failure to train on suicide prevention | Broughton alleges county and contractor failed to train staff adequately | Defendants say municipal liability requires underlying constitutional violation by employees | Held: No failure-to-train liability because no underlying violation by any official was shown |
Key Cases Cited
- Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97 (Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference to serious medical needs)
- Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825 (subjective knowledge and deliberate indifference standard)
- Comstock v. McCrary, 273 F.3d 693 (6th Cir.) (prisoner must show subjective knowledge; negligence insufficient)
- City of Canton v. Harris, 489 U.S. 378 (municipal failure-to-train standards)
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, 477 U.S. 242 (summary judgment standard)
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (summary judgment burden on nonmoving party)
- Gray v. City of Detroit, 399 F.3d 612 (6th Cir.) (need strong/obvious likelihood of suicide to prove deliberate indifference)