Brown v. Belt
2:15-cv-11549
S.D.W. VaApr 15, 2019Background
- Dan Brown, a West Virginia resident with claimed disabilities (nystagmus and a leg injury; SSA allegedly found him 100% disabled), was stopped/arrested by Clay County deputies on multiple occasions (July 26, 2013; May 22, 2015; July 5, 2016); breath tests showed 0.0 BAC on at least two occasions and DUI charges were later dismissed.
- Brown alleges ADA and Rehabilitation Act violations (failure to accommodate disabilities during field sobriety testing), § 1983 claims (unlawful arrest, due process, and retaliation), negligent supervision/training against Sheriff Samples and Clay County Commission, wrongful arrest (state law), and IIED.
- Defendants served requests for admission; Magistrate Judge Tinsley ordered the plaintiff’s failure to respond to be treated as admissions (including admissions that he failed sobriety tests and that arrests were not based on disability). Brown did not produce promised medical/Social Security records or oppose summary judgment.
- County Defendants moved for summary judgment and to dismiss for failure to prosecute; Brown’s counsel sought to withdraw and Brown failed to appear at a hearing and did not file responses.
- The court granted summary judgment to County Defendants on ADA/RA, negligent training/supervision, § 1983 unlawful arrest/due process, § 1983 retaliation, and wrongful arrest claims; it granted dismissal under Rule 41(b) for Brown’s remaining IIED claims for failure to prosecute and dismissed the County Defendants from the case.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Brown is disabled under ADA/RA for purposes of reasonable-accommodation and discrimination claims | Brown claims nystagmus and leg injury substantially limit major life activities and SSA found him disabled | Defendants say Brown produced no evidence (medical records/SSA documentation) and deposition testimony shows impairments do not substantially limit daily activities | Court: Brown failed to show a disability; summary judgment for defendants on Counts 1 and 3 |
| Failure to train/supervise (County/ Sheriff liability) | Brown contends County/Sheriff failed to fund/train officers on ADA compliance causing discrimination | Defendants: Brown has no evidence about training/funding/supervision; no proof linking supervisory failure to actions | Court: No evidence; summary judgment for Sheriff and Commission on Count 4 |
| § 1983 unlawful arrest / Fourth Amendment (2013 & 2016 arrests) | Brown alleges arrests were without reasonable suspicion/probable cause or based on disability | Defendants rely on admissions (Rule 36) and testimony admitting deputies had probable cause and arrests were not disability-based | Court: Admissions and record show probable cause; § 1983 arrest claims dismissed against County Defendants (Count 5) |
| § 1983 retaliation (failure to investigate robbery; targeted arrests) | Brown alleges arrests/failures to investigate were retaliation for prior suit/dismissals | Defendants: Brown admitted Deputy Belt did not retaliate in key respects; no evidence linking defendants to retaliatory motive | Court: No evidence of retaliation; summary judgment for County Defendants on Counts 11, 12, 14 |
| State-law wrongful arrest / false imprisonment (July 5, 2016) | Brown asserts wrongful arrest against deputies, Sheriff, Commission | Defendants: Brown admitted probable cause; no facts tying supervisory defendants to arrest | Court: Summary judgment for County Defendants on Count 9 |
| IIED (Count 16) and dismissal for failure to prosecute | Brown alleges continuing outrageous conduct causing severe emotional distress | Defendants: Procedural record of discovery noncompliance, failure to produce documents, and failure to attend hearing justify dismissal; also argue merits are lacking | Court: Although defendants didn’t move for summary judgment on IIED, court dismissed remaining IIED claims with prejudice under Rule 41(b) for failure to prosecute (also finding merits weak) |
Key Cases Cited
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, 477 U.S. 242 (summary judgment standard explained)
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (party moving for summary judgment must show absence of evidence for nonmovant)
- Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (Fourth Amendment standard preempts substantive due process for seizure/excessive force claims)
- Monell v. Department of Social Servs. of City of New York, 436 U.S. 658 (municipal liability requires an official policy or custom)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (individual liability under § 1983 requires personal involvement)
- Waller ex rel. Estate of Hunt v. Danville, VA, 556 F.3d 171 (recognizing wrongful-arrest and reasonable-accommodation forms of Title II claims)
- Shaw v. Stroud, 13 F.3d 791 (supervisory liability principles under § 1983)
- Constantine v. Rectors & Visitors of George Mason Univ., 411 F.3d 474 (elements of ADA/RA claim and retaliation framework)