53 F.4th 939
6th Cir.2022Background
- Wellpath contracted to provide medical staff at Macomb County Jail and assigned Dr. Steven Cogswell, who sexually assaulted three inmates (Bills, Buetenmiller, Glass) in the jail medical clinic using a privacy screen.
- Officer William Horan was the corrections officer assigned to the medical unit; staff had a policy that sensitive exams should have a chaperone.
- Horan reported concerns that Cogswell saw patients unchaperoned; a Wellpath nursing director checked and observed nothing suspicious.
- Surveillance video (no audio) showed varying officer presence during the incidents; one video showed no officer on duty during one assault.
- Buetenmiller and Glass reported the assaults days later; Wellpath suspended and then terminated Cogswell, who was later criminally convicted.
- Plaintiffs sued Cogswell (defaulted), Horan (§ 1983 Eighth/Fourteenth Amendment claims), Macomb County and Wellpath (Monell), and brought state-law claims against Wellpath; the district court granted summary judgment to defendants and plaintiffs appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Eighth Amendment failure-to-protect (Bills & Buetenmiller v. Horan) | Horan knew or should have known of suspicious conduct and failed to protect inmates from Cogswell | Horan lacked knowledge of a specific substantial risk, reported concerns, and asked for a nursing check; videos and no complaints show no deliberate indifference | Affirmed — plaintiffs lacked evidence Horan knew of a specific substantial risk or deliberately disregarded it |
| Fourteenth Amendment failure-to-protect (pretrial detainee Glass v. Horan) | Horan intentionally created/maintained conditions that put Glass at risk and failed to take reasonable steps | No specific notice of risk; nursing director’s check dispelled suspicions; Westmoreland standard not met | Affirmed — fails first Westmoreland element (no intentional decision with knowledge of specific risk) |
| Monell claims vs. Macomb County and Wellpath (failure to train/supervise) | County/Wellpath failed to train/supervise/correct risks that would have prevented assaults | Plaintiffs offered no developed Monell argument or supporting evidence on appeal | Affirmed — Monell arguments forfeited/undeveloped on appeal |
| State-law claims vs. Wellpath (Elliott-Larsen & respondeat superior) | Wellpath vicariously liable for Cogswell; constructive notice of risk; alternate choice-of-law urged | Sexual assault was outside scope of employment; plaintiffs forfeited Vermont-law argument and the constructive-notice claim was perfunctory | Affirmed — Michigan law bars vicarious liability for employee’s intentional sexual assault; alternative arguments forfeited |
Key Cases Cited
- Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825 (1994) (deliberate-indifference standard for risk to inmate safety)
- Scott v. Harris, 550 U.S. 372 (2007) (video evidence may be viewed in the light it depicts at summary judgment)
- Monell v. Dep’t of Soc. Servs. of New York, 436 U.S. 658 (1978) (municipal liability requires policy/custom causing constitutional violation)
- Brawner v. Scott County, 14 F.4th 585 (6th Cir. 2021) (reasonable-officer standard applied to certain pretrial detainee claims)
- Westmoreland v. Butler County, 29 F.4th 721 (6th Cir. 2022) (four-prong test for pretrial-detainee failure-to-protect claims)
- Jane Doe v. Jackson Loc. Sch. Dist. Bd. of Educ., 954 F.3d 925 (6th Cir. 2020) (official must know of the specific risk that later develops)
- Hamed v. Wayne County, 803 N.W.2d 237 (Mich. 2011) (Elliott-Larsen requires showing submission to proscribed conduct as condition of service; vicarious liability principles)
- Zsigo v. Hurley Med. Ctr., 475 Mich. 215 (2006) (sexual misconduct by employee not within scope of employment for respondeat superior)