Donnitta Sinclair v. City of Seattle, 61 F.4th 674

Background

In June 2020 the City of Seattle withdrew SPD officers from the East Precinct; protesters established the Capitol Hill Occupied Protest (CHOP) zone and the City provided material support (barriers, portable toilets, lighting) and publicly downplayed risks.
City leaders (mayor and councilmember) publicly framed CHOP as peaceful while violence and crime within CHOP increased, including multiple shootings and at least one homicide.
On or about June 20, 2020 Horace Lorenzo Anderson Jr., a 19‑year‑old with special needs, was shot inside CHOP and later died after delayed emergency response.
Sinclair (the decedent’s mother) sued the City under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 seeking damages for deprivation of her Fourteenth Amendment substantive due process right to the companionship of her adult son, alleging a state‑created danger and deliberate indifference.
The district court dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim; the Ninth Circuit affirmed, concluding Sinclair adequately alleged the City created an actual danger and acted with deliberate indifference to CHOP generally, but failed to plead that the danger was particularized to her or her son.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether a parent has a Fourteenth Amendment liberty interest in companionship with an adult child	Sinclair: Ninth Circuit precedent recognizes parents’ substantive due process right to companionship of adult children.	City: The Supreme Court has not recognized such a right and most circuits limit the right to minor children.	Court: Bound by Ninth Circuit precedent; recognizes the right for purposes of this case but notes other circuits disagree and a concurrence would reject the right.
Whether the City’s conduct affirmatively created an "actual" state‑created danger	Sinclair: City’s actions (abandoning precinct, providing barricades/toilets/lighting, promoting CHOP) incubated lawlessness and thus created an actual danger.	City: Analogous to tactical withdrawal in Johnson; City argues its conduct did not affirmatively increase risk in a legally cognizable way.	Court: Plaintiff plausibly alleged the City created an actual danger (distinguishing Johnson because City’s support was affirmative and prolonged).
Whether the danger was "particularized" to Sinclair or her son	Sinclair: The City created the particularized danger of lawlessness that attracted and endangered visitors like her son.	City: The danger was generalized to all CHOP visitors, not directed at a specific, known victim.	Court: The danger was generalized; Sinclair failed to allege the danger was sufficiently particularized to her or her son, so § 1983 claim fails.
Whether the City was deliberately indifferent in the immediate post‑shooting medical response	Sinclair: Delays and miscommunications by SPD/SFD show deliberate indifference to saving Anderson’s life.	City: Medics attempted to assist and delays were due to miscommunication, not deliberate indifference; ambulance was staged nearby.	Court: Allegations do not show deliberate indifference to Anderson’s individual medical needs; no liability based on post‑shooting response.

Key Cases Cited

DeShaney v. Winnebago Cnty. Dep’t of Soc. Servs., 489 U.S. 189 (U.S. 1989) (general rule that the state ordinarily has no constitutional duty to protect individuals from private violence)
Kennedy v. City of Ridgefield, 439 F.3d 1055 (9th Cir. 2006) (state‑created danger requires an actual, particularized danger)
Hernandez v. City of San Jose, 897 F.3d 1125 (9th Cir. 2018) (elements and deliberate‑indifference standard for state‑created danger claims)
Johnson v. City of Seattle, 474 F.3d 634 (9th Cir. 2007) (tactical police withdrawal did not create an affirmative danger)
Porter v. Osborn, 546 F.3d 1131 (9th Cir. 2008) (Ninth Circuit precedent recognizing parental interest in companionship applied post‑shooting)
Lee v. City of Los Angeles, 250 F.3d 668 (9th Cir. 2001) (discussing parental liberty interest in companionship)
Reed v. Gardner, 986 F.2d 1122 (7th Cir. 1993) (Seventh Circuit recognizing state‑created danger where government conduct increased risk to undifferentiated motorists)
Washington v. Glucksberg, 521 U.S. 702 (U.S. 1997) (standard for recognizing new substantive due process rights)