993 F.3d 584
8th Cir.2021Background
- DeJuan Brison, a pretrial detainee, was transferred from the St. Louis City Justice Center to the Jennings Detention Center and later committed suicide by hanging in his Jennings cell.
- St. Louis had a written Crisis Watch Status policy: "Full Suicide Watch" (rigorous supervision) and a less-restrictive "Close Observation" for detainees deemed acutely disturbed but not suicidal.
- Policy required officials to notify receiving facilities of any watch status and provide the detainee’s Medical Screening Assessment Form on transfer.
- A Qualified Mental Health Professional in St. Louis downgraded Brison from Full Suicide Watch to Close Observation, concluding he was non-suicidal, and Brison was transferred without Jennings being notified of his watch status.
- Plaintiffs sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging Adams (a St. Louis officer who had a duty under local policy to notify Jennings) was deliberately indifferent by failing to inform Jennings; the district court denied Adams qualified immunity and Adams appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether failing to notify receiving jail of detainee's watch status (Close Observation) violated Brison's Fourteenth Amendment right (deliberate indifference) | Adams knew Brison had suicide risk; failing to inform intake showed deliberate indifference | Adams reasonably relied on a mental-health professional’s finding that Brison was non-suicidal; no known substantial risk existed | No clearly established constitutional violation on these facts; summary judgment on qualified immunity should have been granted |
| Whether the right was clearly established such that qualified immunity does not apply | Plaintiffs cite out-of-circuit authority (Cavalieri) and argue transferring officers must warn receiving facilities of suicide risk | Defendant says no controlling precedent squarely governs when a MH professional found a detainee non-suicidal; one out-of-circuit case is insufficient | No controlling or robustly consistent precedent; qualified immunity applies |
Key Cases Cited
- Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511 (1985) (denial of qualified immunity is immediately appealable)
- Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825 (1994) (deliberate indifference requires subjective awareness of substantial risk)
- Malley v. Briggs, 475 U.S. 335 (1986) (qualified immunity protects all but the plainly incompetent or those who knowingly violate the law)
- Graham v. Barnette, 970 F.3d 1075 (8th Cir. 2020) (clearly established law must be specific to the circumstances)
- Boswell v. Sherburne County, 849 F.2d 1117 (8th Cir. 1988) (jailer’s failure to contact medical professionals about a known serious condition could violate rights)
- Cavalieri v. Shepard, 321 F.3d 616 (7th Cir. 2003) (affirmed denial of qualified immunity where transferring officer failed to warn receiving authorities of suicide risk)
- Coleman v. Parkman, 349 F.3d 534 (8th Cir. 2003) (detention officers have a general duty to guard against known suicide risks)
- Engleman v. Deputy Murray, 546 F.3d 944 (8th Cir. 2008) (rights for qualified-immunity analysis must be defined with factual specificity)