Shelton v. ARKANSAS DEPT. OF HUMAN SERVICES
677 F.3d 837
8th Cir.2012Background
- Brenda Shelton voluntarily admitted herself to Arkansas State Hospital on Oct 20, 2008 and was placed on suicide watch.
- Brenda was later taken off suicide watch based on physician's instruction.
- Three days after removal, Brenda hanged herself in her room.
- Nurses allegedly refused mouth-to-mouth resuscitation due to lack of protective shields and ambulatory breathing bags were locked away.
- Plaintiff Amber Shelton, administratrix of Brenda's estate, sues multiple public officials and health professionals for state-law tort claims, a federal substantive due process claim, and federal ADA and Rehabilitation Act claims; district court dismissed federal claims with prejudice and state claims without prejudice.
- Appellant appeals the district court's decision, challenging only the federal claims as to non-physician defendants; district court's reasoning for dismissal is affirmed in whole.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a constitutional duty of care arises for state actors toward involuntarily detained patients. | Shelton asserts a Kennedy-based duty applies after discovery of self-harm risk. | Appellees argue no duty arises for voluntary patients and Kennedy does not apply post-discovery. | No constitutional duty arose post-discovery; Kennedy not extendable here. |
| Whether defendants can be liable under elevated due process standards for post-discovery emergency care decisions. | Appellant contends emergency decisions imposed a constitutional duty of care. | Defendants argue emergency care decisions do not create a constitutional duty absent involuntary status. | Kennedy does not extend to emergency medical decisions; no constitutional duty. |
| Whether removal from suicide watch is a medical-treatment decision barred under ADA/Rehabilitation Act claims. | Removal from suicide watch constitutes failure to provide protected medical treatment. | Removal from suicide watch is a medical-treatment decision, not a civil-right claim basis. | Removal from suicide watch treated as medical decision; ADA/Rehab Act claims barred. |
| Whether Arkansas statutes could convert voluntary to involuntary status to create duty. | Statutory requirements could create duty upon discovery of risk. | Statutes unlikely to convert status in this factual setting. | Even assuming conversion possible, claims fail for other independent reasons. |
| Whether federal claims were properly dismissed with prejudice and state claims declined for jurisdiction. | Federal questions should not be dismissed with prejudice. | Claims fail on merits; court should dismiss with prejudice and decline ancillary jurisdiction over state claims. | Federal claims dismissed with prejudice; district court affirmed without exercising jurisdiction over state claims. |
Key Cases Cited
- DeShaney v. Winnebago Cnty. Dep't of Soc. Servs., 489 U.S. 189 (U.S. 1989) (due process duty to protect from harm when state acts to restrain liberty)
- Kennedy v. Schafer, 71 F.3d 292 (8th Cir. 1995) (potential duty to convert voluntary to involuntary status under certain conditions)
- Fields v. Abbott, 652 F.3d 886 (8th Cir. 2011) (assessing when rights are clearly established for qualified immunity)
- Hott v. Hennepin Cnty., Minn., 260 F.3d 901 (8th Cir. 2001) (treatment of jail-suicide prevention as medical treatment claim)
- Liebe v. Norton, 157 F.3d 574 (8th Cir. 1998) (suicide risk rights tied to medical needs and treatment)
- Burger v. Bloomberg, 418 F.3d 882 (8th Cir. 2005) (ADA/Rehabilitation Act claims cannot be based on medical treatment decisions)
- Schiavo ex rel. Schindler v. Schiavo, 403 F.3d 1289 (11th Cir. 2005) (imported as precedent on medical decision-making and rights of disabled individuals)
- Fitzgerald v. Corr. Corp. of Am., 403 F.3d 1134 (10th Cir. 2005) (ADA/Rehabilitation Act claims cannot rest on medical treatment decisions)