455 F. App'x 427
5th Cir.2011Background
- Parada illegally entered the U.S. and was detained by Border Patrol; he and his brother were transferred to Crystal City Correctional Center (CCCC) under USMS custody after a misdemeanor entry conviction.
- CCCC initially segregated Parada for TB testing; tests later showed no active TB.
- Parada developed severe vomiting, diarrhea, weakness; he received medical treatment but deteriorated.
- Parada was transported to a hospital; died at 7:15 a.m. from a heart attack precipitated by electrolyte imbalance due to malnutrition and dehydration.
- The USMS housed Parada at CCCC under a 2003 intergovernmental agreement with Crystal City; the City contracted with BRG for daily operations; TCJS conducted state inspections.
- USMS policies require medical care for prisoners and 24-hour emergency medical coverage; Directives require facility inspections and oversight as part of the IGA framework.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Discretionary function issue about inspection duty | Appellants say USMS Directives create a nondiscretionary duty to inspect | USMS policies are aspirational and do not prescribe specific actions | Not nondiscretionary; inspection duty insufficient to overcome discretionary function exception |
| Discretionary function issue about medical oversight | USMS policy to ensure medical care imposed nondiscretionary duty | Oversight is a discretionary function (Guile) | Medical oversight is discretionary; fails Gaubert test |
| Constitutional claim under FTCA | Failure to provide care violated constitutional rights | Discretionary function applies; no plausible constitutional violation | Discretionary function exception bars FTCA liability; no plausible constitutional claim |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Gaubert, 499 U.S. 315 (1991) (two-part Gaubert test for discretionary functions: discretion and policy-based protection)
- Spotts v. United States, 613 F.3d 559 (5th Cir. 2010) (applies Gaubert; discretionary decisions preclude FTCA liability)
- Guile v. United States, 422 F.3d 221 (5th Cir. 2005) (supervision/oversight of contractor work is discretionary)
- Freeman v. United States, 556 F.3d 326 (5th Cir. 2009) (policy statements that seem mandatory may be aspirational; not nondiscretionary duty)
- Harold H. Huggins Realty, Inc. v. FNC, Inc., 634 F.3d 787 (5th Cir. 2011) (consideration of pleadings and facts under Twombly/Iqbal in FTCA context)