380 F. Supp. 3d 812
S.D. Ind.2019Background
- Terrell Day, an 18-year-old with obesity, was detained after a Burlington loss-prevention officer suspected shoplifting and a possible gun; Day returned a watch and a gun was found near his hand when officers arrived.
- Day was handcuffed (initially one pair, later a second pair added), positioned on a grassy slope and then on pavement; he repeatedly complained of difficulty breathing.
- Medics initially evaluated Day, found normal vitals and declined transport; officers signed a Treatment/Transport Refusal so custody returned to police.
- Day became less responsive while officers and deputies prepared to transport him; a second ambulance performed CPR and pronounced him dead on scene. Autopsy listed sudden cardiac death with contributory respiratory compromise from hands cuffed behind back and obesity.
- Plaintiffs sued officers Denny and Wooten (official and individual capacities) and the City of Indianapolis under 42 U.S.C. §1983 (Fourth Amendment excessive force/unreasonable seizure) and state-law negligence/wrongful death/loss-of-child’s-services claims.
- Court framed facts in plaintiffs’ favor for summary-judgment analysis and considered qualified immunity and Indiana Tort Claims Act defenses.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Official-capacity / Monell liability | City liable because officers followed city policies/practices (handcuffing obese detainee, signing refusal for medics) | Plaintiffs waived any Monell claim in contention interrogatory; no municipal-policy evidence | Court: Plaintiffs waived Monell claim by answering interrogatory; official-capacity claims merged into city claim dismissed on waiver |
| Individual-capacity Fourth Amendment (excessive force/unreasonable seizure) | Officers unreasonably left Day handcuffed behind his back despite obesity, distress, and lack of current threat, contributing to death | Initial handcuffing was lawful; after gun secured officers reasonably controlled scene and relied on medics' clearance | Court: Genuine factual disputes preclude summary judgment; viewing facts for plaintiffs, officers may have violated Fourth Amendment; summary judgment denied as to individual-capacity claims |
| Qualified immunity | Plaintiffs: clearly established law requires officers to consider known medical conditions before cuffing behind back | Defendants: no clearly established right preventing a nonresisting obese detainee from lying on his back with cuffs after medics cleared him | Court: Right was clearly established under Seventh Circuit precedents; officers not entitled to qualified immunity on individual claims |
| State-law negligence / wrongful death / loss-of-services | Officers negligent in care causing death | ITCA immunizes officers individually; City immune under ITCA §34-13-3-3(8) for law-enforcement activity | Court: Officers immune individually (respondeat superior applies); City entitled to ITCA law-enforcement immunity; summary judgment granted on state-law claims |
Key Cases Cited
- Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (1989) (use-of-force claims judged by objective reasonableness under the Fourth Amendment)
- Saucier v. Katz, 533 U.S. 194 (2001) (two-step qualified-immunity framework: constitutional violation then clearly established right)
- Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223 (2009) (courts may decide qualified-immunity prongs in most appropriate order)
- Payne v. Pauley, 337 F.3d 767 (7th Cir. 2003) (excessively tight handcuffs and force on nonresisting arrestees may be unconstitutional)
- Walker v. Sheahan, 526 F.3d 973 (7th Cir. 2008) (official-capacity suits are treated as suits against the municipal employer)