Estate of Johnson Ex Rel. Johnson v. Weber
2017 SD 36
| S.D. | 2017Background
- Ronald E. Johnson, a 24-year correctional officer at the South Dakota State Penitentiary, was murdered by inmates Eric Robert and Rodney Berget during an escape attempt in April 2011.
- DOC prepared and published a voluntary "After-Incident Report" concluding staff followed all policies; Johnson (estate and widow Lynette) alleges the report omitted material facts about inmate classification and prior warnings.
- Plaintiffs sued in state court on multiple theories (wrongful death, survival, § 1983, IIED, negligent infliction, fraudulent misrepresentation); the § 1983 claim was removed to federal court.
- The federal district court granted qualified immunity on the § 1983 claim under the state-created-danger framework; the Eighth Circuit affirmed. Remaining state-law claims were remanded.
- On remand the circuit court granted summary judgment for DOC on IIED and fraudulent misrepresentation and held res judicata barred a separate state-constitutional due process claim; the South Dakota Supreme Court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether DOC's publication of the Incident Report supports IIED | The report was "sanitized" and omitted key facts intentionally, causing severe emotional distress to Lynette Johnson; DOC's relationship as employer/agencies increases culpability | The report was a voluntary public account that did not intentionally deceive or reach the extreme-outrageous threshold required for IIED | Affirmed — report omissions, even if self-serving or inaccurate, did not constitute extreme and outrageous conduct |
| Whether fraudulent misrepresentation exists from the Incident Report | DOC intended to induce reliance by publishing the report to Lynette; omissions caused her to rely and suffer emotional injury | No evidence DOC made statements to deceive, no evidence plaintiff took an action in justifiable reliance or suffered pecuniary loss because of reliance | Affirmed — plaintiff failed to show deceitful intent, justifiable reliance, or damages arising from reliance |
| Whether a private cause of action exists under Article VI, § 2 (SD Constitution) separate from § 1983 | The state due process clause should allow a private damages action and be interpreted more broadly than federal doctrine | State and federal due process clauses are virtually identical; the federal adjudication of the § 1983 claim precludes relitigation; res judicata applies | Affirmed — court declines to recognize a new private state constitutional damages action; claim barred by res judicata (federal judgment on same constitutional wrong) |
Key Cases Cited
- Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 (qualified immunity framework for government officials)
- DeShaney v. Winnebago Cty. Dep’t of Soc. Servs., 489 U.S. 189 (no affirmative duty to protect from private violence absent custody/state-created danger)
- Fields v. Abbott, 652 F.3d 886 (8th Cir. recognizing state-created-danger test and its five elements)
- Hart v. City of Little Rock, 432 F.3d 801 (source of elements used in state-created-danger analysis)
- Estate of Johnson v. Weber, 785 F.3d 267 (8th Cir. opinion affirming qualified immunity on § 1983/state-created-danger claim)
- Fix v. First State Bank of Roscoe, 807 N.W.2d 612 (S.D. 2011) (elements and high standard for IIED in South Dakota)
- Richardson v. E. River Elec. Power Coop., 531 N.W.2d 23 (S.D. 1995) (definition of "outrageous" conduct for IIED)
- Banyas v. Lower Bucks Hosp., 437 A.2d 1236 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1981) (false cause-of-death report supported IIED; cited as distinguishable)
- Thomas v. Hospital Bd. of Directors of Lee County, 41 So.3d 246 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010) (cover-up of cause of death supported IIED; cited as distinguishable)