935 F.3d 485
6th Cir.2019Background
- In Jan 2010 Joann Matouk Romain's car was found alone at a church; two months later her body was recovered from the Detroit River and three autopsies concluded drowning with manner of death undetermined.
- Police followed footprints from the parked car to the water, activated dive teams and Coast Guard; no body was recovered during the initial search.
- The estate alleges a police cover-up: an officer allegedly contacted Joann's home before police discovered the footprints; a spare key went missing a month earlier and later was in police possession; photos and witness statements suggest more footprints, a possible struggle, and a discarded scarf.
- The estate sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging a state-created-danger substantive due process violation and asserted a Monell claim and other theories; district court granted summary judgment for defendants.
- On appeal the estate shifted theories (arguing conspiratorial police participation in murder), but the court limited review to the state-created-danger claim as presented below.
- The Sixth Circuit affirmed summary judgment, holding the estate failed to raise a genuine issue that police affirmatively increased Joann’s risk by assuring a killer they would conceal the crime or otherwise created the danger required by the doctrine.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether defendants’ actions satisfy the state-created-danger test under § 1983 | Estate: police affirmatively told Killer Doe they would cover up the murder and botched the investigation to reduce risk, inducing the killing | Defendants: no evidence they created or increased risk; at most investigatory choices and ordinary law enforcement discretion | Court: No genuine dispute; estate failed to show affirmative act increasing risk or requisite factual basis for such an inference; summary judgment affirmed |
| Whether police conduct amounted to a Monell municipal policy or custom causing constitutional violation | Estate: systemic conspiracy/not investigating amounts to municipal liability | Defendants: no underlying constitutional violation by officers, so no municipal liability | Court: Monell claim fails because individual-actor claims fail; no municipal liability |
| Whether plaintiffs may pursue a new theory (police participated in murder) on appeal | Estate: argues co-conspirator liability and direct responsibility for murder | Defendants: appellate theory differs from complaint and summary-judgment presentations | Held: Plaintiff cannot change theory on appeal; court reviews the claim as litigated below |
| Whether estate may assert an access-to-courts claim based on botched investigation despite district court denying leave to amend | Estate: contends denial of leave should be excused and seeks review on merits | Defendants: procedural bar; claim not pleaded in operative complaint and leave denied | Court: Declines to consider that unpleaded claim on appeal |
Key Cases Cited
- DeShaney v. Winnebago County Dep't of Social Servs., 489 U.S. 189 (1989) (Due Process Clause does not generally require state to protect individuals from private actors; duty arises in custodial-like restraints)
- Cartwright v. City of Marine City, 336 F.3d 487 (6th Cir. 2003) (articulating elements of state-created-danger claim)
- Jones v. Reynolds, 438 F.3d 685 (6th Cir. 2006) (if officers organize or participate in private crime, liability turns on their direct responsibility)
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (1986) (standard for genuine dispute and summary judgment review)
- Fox v. DeSoto, 489 F.3d 227 (6th Cir. 2007) (municipal liability requires an underlying constitutional violation by its agents)
- Dwares v. City of New York, 985 F.2d 94 (2d Cir. 1993) (recognizing theory that law-enforcement assurances can increase risk of private violence in state-created-danger contexts)