2:18-cv-01568
W.D. Wash.Dec 5, 2019Background
- Plaintiff Samuel D. Manning, a pretrial detainee, sued King County and three jail staff under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for events while housed on "10 North" at King County Jail; he proceeded pro se and IFP and did not oppose summary judgment.
- Manning alleged verbal threats/name-calling (including being labeled a "rapist"), withholding toiletries and toilet paper, retaliation for PREA and federal filings, and a November 11, 2018 assault by Officer Mendoza that caused a concussion and dislocated wrist.
- Defendants (Officers Williams, Mendoza, Captain Urie, and King County) presented declarations that Manning verbally provoked staff, initiated a physical attack on November 11 (punching Mendoza), and resisted orders; control-room video was not cited but a control officer witnessed the fight.
- Jail medical records show only superficial facial scratches and right arm pain; Harborview found no wrist fracture/dislocation and no confirmed concussion.
- Captain Urie forwarded Manning’s PREA/kite complaints to shift command; Urie was not assigned to investigate and did not direct staff assignments.
- The magistrate judge recommended granting summary judgment for defendants and dismissing the action with prejudice.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Municipal liability (Monell) | County liable because injury occurred in its custody; plaintiff later sought to identify an "excessive force policy" | No policy/custom shown linking County policy to alleged harms | Dismissed — no Monell claim; plaintiff failed to identify causative policy |
| Verbal harassment | Williams/Mendoza called him names and threatened him | Verbal abuse alone is not unconstitutional | Dismissed — verbal abuse not a § 1983 violation |
| Failure to protect / "incitement" | Being labeled a "rapist" exposed him to inmate threats | Labeling alone, unsupported by specific threats or harm, insufficient | Dismissed — insufficient evidence of substantial risk or deliberate indifference |
| Conditions of confinement | Officers withheld toilet paper, soap, toothpaste for hours | Allegations are vague, short-term, and within confinement discomforts | Dismissed — not punishment under Due Process; no constitutional violation |
| Retaliation | Officers punished him for filing PREA/federal suit; timing supports motive | Timing/speculation insufficient; no direct evidence of retaliatory motive | Dismissed — speculative; no genuine issue of retaliatory motive |
| Excessive force | Mendoza beat him, causing concussion and dislocated wrist | Mendoza acted in self-defense after Manning initiated assault; medical records contradict severe injuries | Dismissed — force objectively reasonable given plaintiff’s attack; medical evidence contradicts claimed injuries |
| Supervisor liability (Urie) | Urie knew of complaints and failed to investigate or stop misconduct | Urie promptly referred complaints to shift command and was not assigned to investigate or set staff | Dismissed — no personal involvement or causal link; no supervisory liability |
Key Cases Cited
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, 477 U.S. 242 (summary judgment standard)
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (movant’s initial burden on summary judgment)
- Monell v. Dep’t of Soc. Servs. of City of New York, 436 U.S. 658 (municipal liability under § 1983 requires policy or custom)
- Kingsley v. Hendrickson, 576 U.S. 389 (objective-unreasonableness standard for pretrial-detainee excessive force)
- Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (excessive force analysis)
- Scott v. Harris, 550 U.S. 372 (court need not accept facts contradicted by record)
- Bell v. Wolfish, 441 U.S. 520 (pretrial detainees protected from punitive conditions)
- Valandingham v. Bojorquez, 866 F.2d 1135 (risk from labeling an inmate as a snitch)