365 P.3d 67
N.M. Ct. App.2015Background
- Juventino Ceballos Hernandez, a Mexican national, suffered an episode at a home in Clovis, NM; police arrested him after an unprovoked attack on officers, restrained him in a hogtie, and dragged him outside, causing abrasions and bleeding.
- EMTs placed him face down on a backboard with handcuffs, ankle cuffs and spider straps; at the hospital Dr. Thibodeau kept him restrained and gave chemical sedation; he stopped breathing, suffered brain damage, was returned to Mexico, and later died.
- Plaintiffs (estate and family) sued the City, individual officers, the hospital, and Dr. Thibodeau for wrongful death, § 1983 excessive force, battery, negligence, loss of consortium, and related claims; the hospital/doctor settled pretrial.
- The district court granted summary judgment for defendants on the wrongful death claim (holding officers’ liability ended when Hernandez entered the ER), dismissed negligent infliction claim, directed verdict for defendants on battery, and the jury returned defense verdicts on remaining claims.
- On appeal the court considered (1) whether summary judgment on wrongful death was proper under New Mexico multiple-tortfeasor/successive-tortfeasor (joint-and-several) doctrine, (2) whether defendants’ peremptory strikes unconstitutionally excluded Hispanics (Batson/Edmonson), and several other issues including the directed verdict on battery.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether summary judgment on wrongful death (state tort law) was proper under successive-tortfeasor/joint-and-several liability | Hernandez’s death flowed from officers’ negligent original injuries (hogtie, dragging, abrasions) that foreseeably required medical care; negligent medical treatment later caused separate, enhanced injury/death — so original tortfeasors can be jointly and severally liable | Officers’ liability ended when Hernandez was delivered to the emergency room; negligent medical care was a superseding cause absolving officers | Reversed as to state wrongful death claim — triable issues exist whether officers’ negligence caused an original injury that foreseeably led to negligent medical care; jury must decide joint-and-several liability |
| Whether summary judgment on § 1983 claim was improper (proximate cause / superseding cause) | (Argued) police conduct contributed to constitutional injury/death | (Argued) ER negligence was superseding; police not proximate cause of cardiac arrest/death | Affirmed as to § 1983 claim — plaintiffs cited no authority to show error; summary judgment stands |
| Whether defendants’ peremptory strikes violated Batson/Edmonson by excluding Hispanics from the venire | Strikes targeted Hispanic-surnamed jurors; resulted in an all non-Hispanic jury and violated equal protection in civil case | Peremptory strikes were race-neutral (caregiver occupation, concerns about trial delay from asthma, unemployment, tactical reasons) and some strikes were against Anglo-surnamed jurors too | Reversed: court applies Batson to civil cases (Edmonson). At least one strike (Juror No. 27) lacked a sufficiently specific, race-neutral explanation and, in the totality, strikes established discriminatory pattern — verdict vacated; new trial ordered |
| Whether directed verdict on battery was proper | (Plaintiffs) facts support battery: offensive touching (hogtie, dragging) — jury could find battery | (Defendants) (raised later) intentional tort does not survive decedent’s unrelated death; district court found for defendants | Court holds district court erred in granting directed verdict on battery; claim should have gone to jury |
Key Cases Cited
- Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (racial discrimination in jury selection violates Equal Protection)
- Edmonson v. Leesville Concrete Co., 500 U.S. 614 (peremptory strikes by private litigant in civil case cannot be used to exclude jurors on account of race)
- J.E.B. v. Alabama ex rel. T.B., 511 U.S. 127 (gender, like race, is an unconstitutional proxy in jury selection)
- Purkett v. Elem, 514 U.S. 765 (proponent of strike need only provide a race-neutral explanation; plausibility—not persuasiveness—controls)
- Miller-El v. Dretke, 545 U.S. 231 (trial court must assess plausibility of race-neutral explanations; comparative juror analysis relevant)