2:19-cv-00429
E.D. Cal.May 26, 2021Background:
- Plaintiffs Tina Tennyson and sons Dominic and Devon allege multiple incidents in 2018–2019 where Sacramento County sheriff’s deputies stopped, searched, arrested, and used force against family members without probable cause, including a warrantless home search and an incident where deputies pointed guns, twisted Devon’s arms, and stood on him.
- Devon alleges recurring stops and surveillance, an arrest that precipitated his partner’s premature labor, and a later in-home arrest leading to four days in county jail without charges or medical accommodation for a preexisting back injury.
- Plaintiffs sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Fourth, First, and Fourteenth Amendment theories), state-law tort claims (assault, battery, trespass, negligence, etc.), ADA and Rehabilitation Act claims, and a California Government Code claim for failure to discharge mandatory duties.
- The SAC names the County, the Sheriff’s Department, the Sheriff, and fifteen individual deputies; prior round of briefing led the court to dismiss some claims and permit amendment to identify officers and refine Monell theories.
- Defendants moved to dismiss most federal and state claims under Rule 12(b)(6); the court evaluated municipal liability (Monell), individual excessive force, unlawful arrests/searches, familial-association claims, denial of medical treatment, ADA/Rehab Act claims, and procedural issues (e.g., failure-to-intercede theories waived).
Issues:
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Municipal (Monell) liability for excessive force | County’s policies, training omissions, and a culture of indifference produced unconstitutional force | Allegations are too generalized; no specific pattern, policymaker knowledge, or final policymaking act alleged | Dismissed as pleaded, with leave to amend to plead specific customs, prior incidents, or policymaker action |
| Excessive force by individual deputies | Eight deputies used unreasonable, threatening, and painful force during arrest | Some named officers were not present or did not use force | Claims against eight deputies survive; claims against officers not at scene dismissed with leave to amend |
| Unlawful arrests and searches (Fourth Amendment & state law) | Multiple lengthy, warrantless detentions and several warrantless searches lacked probable cause or suspicion | Defendants contested some officers’ involvement in searches | Three alleged unlawful arrests and related state claims survive; unlawful-search claims dismissed as to officers not alleged to have searched (leave to amend) |
| Familial-association claims (First/Fourteenth Amendments) | Officers’ separation of family members, public handcuffing, and extended detention interfered with family relationships | Conduct did not rise to conscience-shocking or comparable to cases sustaining association claims | Claims dismissed with leave to amend; current allegations insufficient to shock the conscience |
| Denial of medical treatment (preexisting back injury) | Devon reported back pain after arrest; officers/jail staff failed to provide or summon objectively reasonable care | Defendants argued no deliberate-indifference required or challenged causation | Claim survives: pleading that Devon asked for help and received none plausibly states entitlement to relief |
| ADA & Rehabilitation Act claims | Devon’s intermittent back impairment substantially limits major life activities; jail failed to accommodate him (no mat for four days) | County argued allegations inconsistent (e.g., driving to work despite disability) | Claims survive: intermittent limitations can constitute disability; pleadings adequate at this stage |
Key Cases Cited
- Monell v. Department of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658 (1978) (municipal liability under § 1983 requires a policy, custom, or action by a policymaker)
- Pembaur v. Cincinnati, 475 U.S. 469 (1986) (single decision by official with final policymaking authority can constitute municipal policy)
- City of Canton v. Harris, 489 U.S. 378 (1989) (failure-to-train may establish municipal liability when deliberate indifference to rights is shown)
- Castro v. County of Los Angeles, 833 F.3d 1060 (9th Cir. 2016) (Monell standard and deliberate indifference discussion)
- Menotti v. City of Seattle, 409 F.3d 1113 (9th Cir. 2005) (theories of municipal liability: longstanding practice, widespread practices, policymaker acts)
- AE ex rel. Hernandez v. County of Tulare, 666 F.3d 631 (9th Cir. 2012) (generic Monell allegations insufficient)
- Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (1989) (Graham reasonableness test for excessive force under the Fourth Amendment)
- Robinson v. Solano County, 278 F.3d 1007 (9th Cir. 2002) (pointing guns at unarmed, nonthreatening persons can support excessive force claim)
- Thompson v. Rahr, 885 F.3d 582 (9th Cir. 2018) (threatening to shoot and pointing gun at head in minor-crime context can be excessive force)
- Tatum v. City & County of San Francisco, 441 F.3d 1090 (9th Cir. 2006) (officers must obtain necessary medical attention for detainees injured during apprehension)
- Maddox v. City of Los Angeles, 792 F.2d 1408 (9th Cir. 1986) (medical-care obligation for arrestees/detainees)
- Lee v. City of Los Angeles, 250 F.3d 668 (9th Cir. 2001) (familial-association claims analyzed under overlapping First and Fourteenth Amendment frameworks)
- Rosenbaum v. Washoe County, 663 F.3d 1071 (9th Cir. 2011) (conduct that separates family briefly and involves public handcuffing did not shock the conscience)
- Clouthier v. County of Contra Costa, 591 F.3d 1232 (9th Cir. 2010) (policy-by-omission and failure-to-train theories can support Monell claims)