Earl Davis v. Seth Wessel
2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 11685
7th Cir.2015Background
- Davis is civilly detained under the SVP Act, housed at Rushville Facility.
- He alleged Wessel and Lay refused to remove his hand restraints in a courthouse restroom and mocked him.
- The incident occurred on May 22, 2008; he wore a black-box restraint connected to leg shackles.
- Judge Hackett had a standing order stating restraints should be removed to allow restroom use; written order 2/13/2001 referenced this.
- District court instructed the jury under an excessive-force framework; verdict awarded $1,000; defendants appealed.
- This court vacated and remanded for a new trial due to instructional error.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the elements instruction misstated mental-state requirement | Davis asserts intent not required by due process. | Wessel and Lay argue intent is required (Eighth/ Kingsley standard). | Instruction flawed; remand for new trial. |
| Whether court should have given a court-order instruction | Court order showed defendants’ actions were pretextual; should influence verdict. | Instruction unnecessary; could confuse the restraint claim. | Not essential on remand; instruction may be considered in retrial. |
| Whether JMOL/qualified immunity should have been granted | Evidence supported a due-process violation; qualified immunity not applicable. | No clearly established right at the time; merits judgment as a matter of law. | No JMOL; evidence supports denial of qualified immunity; remand for new trial. |
Key Cases Cited
- Bell v. Wolfish, 441 U.S. 520 (1979) (standard for whether conditions punish pretrial detainees)
- Youngberg v. Romeo, 457 U.S. 307 (1982) (freedom from unreasonable restraints for civil detainees)
- May v. Sheahan, 226 F.3d 876 (7th Cir. 2000) (restraints not punitive if related to legitimate purpose} )
- Kingsley v. Hendrickson, 135 S. Ct. 2463 (2015) (requires some state-of-mind inquiry for due process excessive-restraint claims)
- Lewis v. County of Sacramento, 523 U.S. 838 (1998) (negligence insufficient; deliberate abuse standard)
- Hudson v. McMillian, 503 U.S. 1 (1992) (Eighth Amendment standard of force as purposeful or sadistic)
- Calhoun v. DeTella, 319 F.3d 936 (7th Cir. 2003) (strip search conducted to humiliate may state Eighth Amendment claim)
- Hudson v. Palmer, 468 U.S. 517 (1984) (protections against harassment irrelevant to prison needs)