Pratt Ex Rel. Estate of Pratt v. Harris County
2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 8049
| 5th Cir. | 2016Background
- Wayne Pratt behaved erratically after a minor traffic accident; multiple HCSD deputies responded and Pratt ignored commands, fled, and resisted physical restraint.
- Deputies Lopez and Medina deployed tasers multiple times; Pratt was handcuffed but later resumed resisting, kicked officers, and was again tasered in drive-stun mode.
- Deputies Wilks and Goldstein applied a hobble (hog-tie) restraint and Salazar placed a knee on Pratt’s back; Pratt was left briefly hog-tied in a prone position, then lost a pulse; he later died and autopsy listed cause of death as “undetermined.”
- HCSD policy prohibited hog-tying; internal reviews and a grand jury declined prosecution of the deputies; administrative discipline findings were "not sustained."
- Pratt’s mother sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for excessive force (individual officers) and Monell municipal liability (Harris County); district court granted qualified immunity to officers and denied Monell claims; Pratt appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Pratt's Argument | Harris County / Deputies' Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Lopez and Medina used excessive force by tasering Pratt | Tasers were used unnecessarily and unreasonably | Tasers were used after warnings and escalating resistance; measured response | No constitutional violation; qualified immunity granted |
| Whether Wilks, Goldstein, Salazar used excessive force by hog-tying Pratt | Hog-tying (with knee on back) was excessive and caused death; HCSD policy banned it | Hog-tying not per se unconstitutional; used to subdue actively resisting suspect for brief period | No Fourth Amendment violation as a matter of law; qualified immunity granted (majority) |
| Whether other deputies failed to intervene / supervisory failure to train | Failure to intervene or supervise allowed unconstitutional force | Underlying use-of-force claim fails, so derivative claims fail | Dismissed because no underlying constitutional violation established |
| Whether Harris County is liable under Monell for customs, failure to train, or ratification | County maintained unconstitutional customs or failed to train/supervise; ratified conduct | County had a policy banning hog-tying; plaintiff did not plead an official policy causing the violation | Monell claims dismissed for failure to show municipal policy caused constitutional violation |
Key Cases Cited
- Monell v. Department of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658 (1978) (municipal liability requires an official policy or custom causing constitutional violation)
- Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (1989) (excessive-force claims judged by Fourth Amendment reasonableness factors)
- Gutierrez v. City of San Antonio, 139 F.3d 441 (5th Cir. 1998) (hog-tying may present substantial risk when combined with drug-induced excited delirium and prone restraint)
- Hill v. Carroll County, 587 F.3d 230 (5th Cir. 2009) (four-point/hog-tie restraint not per se unconstitutional; context matters)
- Khan v. Normand, 683 F.3d 192 (5th Cir. 2012) (qualified immunity where hog-tying was brief and officers lacked knowledge of drug intoxication)
- Deville v. Marcantel, 567 F.3d 156 (5th Cir. 2009) (summary-judgment standard and excessive-force framework)
- Saucier v. Katz, 533 U.S. 194 (2001) (two-step qualified immunity framework: constitutional violation then clearly established law)
- Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223 (2009) (courts may exercise discretion in order of qualified-immunity prongs)
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (1986) (summary judgment standard)
- Whitley v. Hanna, 726 F.3d 631 (5th Cir. 2013) (§ 1983 elements and individual/official capacity distinctions)