30 F.4th 1181
10th Cir.2022Background
- On Aug. 30, 2017 Susanne Burgaz was booked into the Jefferson County Detention Facility and placed in the Special Housing Unit (SHU); the jail information system (Tiburon) flagged her for prior self-harm, suicidal ideation, prior suicide watch, mental illness, and physical disability (uses a walker).
- A judge ordered her released the next day, but after learning of outstanding warrants she was returned to the SHU dayroom to await release.
- Deputy Pesapane interacted with Burgaz at ~9:02–9:09 p.m.; Burgaz became despondent after learning she would not be released and later began fashioning a noose from TV cords at ~9:22 p.m.; Pesapane left her alone at ~9:09 p.m.
- Deputy Scalise conducted a walk-through down the corridor at ~9:25–9:28 p.m. and did not look directly into the SHU dayroom; Burgaz completed a hanging at ~9:29 p.m.; she was found ~10:00 p.m. and died two days later.
- The Estate sued Deputies Pesapane and Scalise individually under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for deliberate indifference to a pretrial detainee’s medical needs (Fourteenth Amendment) and sued Sheriff Shrader in his official capacity under Monell; the district court dismissed all claims and declined supplemental jurisdiction over state-law claims.
- The Tenth Circuit majority affirmed dismissal: it held the Estate failed to plausibly allege deliberate indifference by either deputy, the Monell claim was properly dismissed, and the state-law claims were properly dismissed after federal claims were dismissed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Deputies were deliberately indifferent to Burgaz’s suicide risk (Pesapane) | Pesapane knew Tiburon’s "red-flag," saw Burgaz become despondent after being told she wouldn’t be released, and left her unattended in a dayroom with obvious ligature hazards | Pesapane lacked notice of an imminent risk; no express suicidal statements or suicide watch; SHU monitoring and deputies’ walk‑throughs made suicide unforeseeable | Majority: Not plausibly alleged; qualified immunity for Pesapane. Dissent: pleadings suffice and should survive dismissal on prong one. |
| Whether Deputies were deliberately indifferent (Scalise) | Scalise knew of Burgaz’s history via Tiburon and failed to observe the dayroom during his walk-through | Scalise lacked actual knowledge of an imminent risk; no direct interaction or obvious indicators when he passed the dayroom | Held: Estate failed to plausibly allege Scalise had actual knowledge; qualified immunity for Scalise. |
| Monell liability against Sheriff Shrader (failure to train/supervise; custom tolerating safety violations) | County policies, customs, and toleration of safety violations caused constitutional violations; failure to train/supervise led to deputies’ misconduct | Monell requires an underlying constitutional violation by an employee for failure-to-train/supervise claims; no individual violation alleged here | Held: Monell claims dismissed—failure-to-train/supervise fails without individual violation; the Estate waived any theory based on combined employee actions. |
| State-law claims (negligence, survival) | Sheriff and Board negligent in operating jail; survival claim for wrongful death | Federal claims dismissed so federal court should decline supplemental jurisdiction | Held: District court properly dismissed state-law claims after dismissing all federal claims. |
Key Cases Cited
- Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825 (U.S. 1994) (deliberate indifference standard; knowledge and recklessness framing)
- Mata v. Saiz, 427 F.3d 745 (10th Cir. 2005) (objective/subjective elements for serious medical need)
- Cox v. Glanz, 800 F.3d 1231 (10th Cir. 2015) (suicide claims treated as medical-care claims)
- Quintana v. Santa Fe Cnty. Bd. of Comm'rs, 973 F.3d 1022 (10th Cir. 2020) (municipal liability and failure-to-train principles)
- Crowson v. Washington Cnty., Utah, 983 F.3d 1166 (10th Cir. 2020) (failure-to-train/supervise requires an underlying constitutional violation)
- Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (U.S. 2009) (plausibility pleading standard)
- Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (U.S. 2007) (plausibility pleading standard)
- Sealock v. Colorado, 218 F.3d 1205 (10th Cir. 2000) (failure to seek medical attention can constitute deliberate indifference)
- Garcia v. Salt Lake Cnty., 768 F.2d 303 (10th Cir. 1985) (municipal liability via combined acts or omissions)
- Garrett v. Stratman, 254 F.3d 946 (10th Cir. 2001) (knowledge inference from obvious risk)