886 F.3d 639
7th Cir.2018Background
- On Sept. 17, 2014 Waterford officer Kayla Demarasse stopped and arrested Jill Otis on suspicion of OWI; Otis was bleeding profusely and twice asked to be taken to a hospital. Otis alleges the officer refused and detained her without medical care.
- Otis filed suit pro se under 42 U.S.C. § 1983; her first amended complaint named Officer Demarasse and alleged deliberate indifference to a serious medical need. The district court screened and allowed a due-process claim against Demarasse to proceed.
- Otis later submitted a pro se second amended filing intended to add the City and County; that submission included many attachments, including Demarasse’s police report, and omitted Demarasse from the caption.
- The police report described taking Otis to a hospital for OWI processing, obtaining blood, and giving scrub pants—contradicting some of Otis’s allegations; hospital records showed no treatment that night but medical records two days later showed severe anemia from uterine bleeding.
- The district court treated the second amended filing as superseding, struck the earlier allegations against Demarasse, credited the attachments, dismissed the claim as implausible/ frivolous, and dismissed municipal defendants on Monell grounds.
- The Seventh Circuit vacated dismissal of the claim against Officer Demarasse and remanded, holding (1) pro se filing should not have been treated as superseding the prior amended complaint and (2) Otis’s amended allegations sufficiently stated a Fourth Amendment seizure/medical-care claim; the court also held the district court erred by treating defendant-authored attachments as dispositive.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Otis waived claims against Officer Demarasse by filing a second amended complaint that omitted the officer | Otis (pro se) intended to add City and County and implicitly incorporate prior allegations; did not intend to drop Demarasse | Demarasse: the second amended complaint superseded prior pleading and thus waived claims | Court: pro se filings must be liberally construed; the submission was an attempt to add parties and incorporate prior allegations—no waiver |
| Which constitutional standard governs (Fourth vs. Fourteenth) | Otis framed claim under Fourteenth (due process/deliberate indifference) | Dist. Ct. applied Fourteenth deliberate-indifference framework | Court: arrest without warrant/without judicial probable-cause determination invokes Fourth Amendment objective-reasonableness standard; Fifth/Fourteenth standards not controlling here |
| Whether Otis plausibly alleged an objectively unreasonable denial of medical care | Otis: she repeatedly told officer she was bleeding heavily, felt sick/near fainting, and was refused hospital care; she could not obtain care while in custody | Demarasse: attachments show Otis was taken to hospital, blood drawn, and given scrubs—undermining claim | Court: accepting Otis’s pleaded facts, she alleged facts sufficient to show officer knew of an objectively serious condition and acted unreasonably in failing to obtain medical care; claim survives screening |
| Whether attachments (police reports, records) permit dismissal because plaintiff pleaded herself out of court | Otis: she repeatedly challenged the police report as false and did not adopt attachments as true | Demarasse: district court may consider attachments which contradict complaint and dismiss as implausible | Court: plaintiff does not automatically adopt defendant-authored exhibits by attaching them; district court erred to credit the report over Otis’s allegations without caution |
Key Cases Cited
- Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89 (2007) (pro se filings are to be liberally construed)
- Monell v. Dep't of Social Servs., 436 U.S. 658 (1978) (municipal liability requires an official policy or custom)
- Lopez v. City of Chicago, 464 F.3d 711 (7th Cir.) (2006) (distinguishes pre- and post-judicial probable-cause treatment for constitutional framework)
- Williams v. Rodriguez, 509 F.3d 392 (7th Cir.) (2007) (Fourth Amendment objective-reasonableness standard governs medical-care claims for pretrial arrestees without a judicial probable-cause determination)
- Ortiz v. City of Chicago, 656 F.3d 523 (7th Cir.) (2011) (same Fourth Amendment rule for warrantless arrests)
- Perez v. Fenoglio, 792 F.3d 768 (7th Cir.) (2015) (examples of pro se deliberate-indifference medical claims deemed sufficient)
- Powers v. Snyder, 484 F.3d 929 (7th Cir.) (2007) (a plaintiff does not adopt every word of an attached defendant-authored document by appending it to a complaint)
- Williamson v. Curran, 714 F.3d 432 (7th Cir.) (2013) (courts may consider attached documents when plaintiff relies on them and has not alleged falsity)
- Luevano v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 722 F.3d 1014 (7th Cir.) (2013) (pleading-stage standard: accept allegations as true and view facts favorably to plaintiff)