344 F. Supp. 3d 644
S.D. Ill.2018Background
- On April 25, 2015 NYPD Detectives Carter and Matias entered supportive-housing premises to contact David Felix (diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia); after an entry into his unit and his flight, Carter shot and killed Felix in the lobby.
- Plaintiffs allege the detectives entered without a warrant, relying only on an NYPD "I-Card," did not follow NYPD procedures for "emotionally disturbed persons" (EDPs), and used excessive force.
- Plaintiffs sued the City (Monell), the detectives, the Bridge (a facility operator), and others, alleging (a) municipal customs/policies permitting improper use of I-Cards, (b) a municipal custom/practice of mishandling EDPs and failing to train, and (c) violations of Title II of the ADA and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act for failing to accommodate Felix’s disability.
- The City moved to dismiss municipal-liability and disability claims. The court accepted allegations as true for Rule 12(b)(6) purposes and evaluated Monell, failure-to-train, and ADA/Rehab Act theories.
- The court dismissed Monell claims premised on (1) a custom/practice of misusing I-Cards (and related failure-to-train regarding I-Cards), (2) a custom/practice of subjecting EDPs to brute/excessive force, and (3) a hiring/screening theory (deemed abandoned). The court allowed to proceed (denied dismissal of) the Monell failure-to-train claim as to handling EDPs and the ADA/Rehabilitation Act claims.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Monell claim: custom/practice of using I-Cards to gain entry | I-cards are treated as de facto warrants; CCRB findings show widespread improper use causing Felix's unlawful entry and flight | CCRB and Patrol Guide allegations insufficient; plaintiffs fail to plead causation linking an I-Card practice to Felix's entry/flight | Dismissed — plaintiffs did not plead the causal chain that the I-Card custom caused the entry and resulting injury |
| Monell claim: custom/practice of subjecting EDPs to brute/excessive force | OIG report and prior civil-rights suits show longstanding deficiencies and a pattern of mistreatment of persons with mental illness | OIG published after incident; cited incidents too few/too dissimilar to show a pervasive custom or deliberate indifference | Dismissed — plaintiffs failed to plead a persistent, widespread custom or deliberate indifference supporting this Monell theory |
| Monell claim: failure to train/supervise re treatment of EDPs | City knew officers would confront EDPs; pre-2015 training was minimal; OIG and complaints show a history and need for CIT/de‑escalation training, and inadequate training was the moving cause | City argues post-incident reports cannot supply notice; criticizes reliance on OIG and scattered complaints | Denied dismissal — plaintiffs plausibly alleged policymakers knew to a moral certainty of encounters with EDPs, training was deficient, and that deficiency could foreseeably cause constitutional deprivations |
| ADA / Rehabilitation Act (Title II) claim | Felix is a qualified individual with schizophrenia; City failed to accommodate him by not training officers or following crisis-intervention policies, causing discrimination/exclusion from police services | City contends plaintiffs fail to allege animus/deliberate indifference or that Felix was a qualified individual in an EDP context | Denied dismissal — court finds plaintiffs sufficiently alleged disability status, Title II/§504 coverage, and deliberate indifference/failure to accommodate based on training deficiencies |
Key Cases Cited
- Monell v. Dept. of Social Servs., 436 U.S. 658 (U.S. 1978) (municipal liability requires an official policy, custom, or deliberate indifference)
- City of Canton v. Harris, 489 U.S. 378 (U.S. 1989) (failure to train can give rise to municipal liability when deliberate indifference shown)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (U.S. 2009) (plausibility standard for pleadings under Rule 12(b)(6))
- Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (U.S. 2007) (plausibility pleading standard)
- Connick v. Thompson, 563 U.S. 51 (U.S. 2011) (Deliberate indifference standard for training-based Monell claims)
- Sorlucco v. New York City Police Dept., 971 F.2d 864 (2d Cir. 1992) (municipal policy/custom standards)
- Wray v. City of New York, 490 F.3d 189 (2d Cir. 2007) (elements of Monell claim)
- Zahra v. Town of Southold, 48 F.3d 674 (2d Cir. 1995) (municipal liability cannot rest on respondeat superior)