308 F.Supp.3d 960
N.D. Ill.2018Background
- In May 2017 Tywon Salters, a jailed pretrial detainee with a history of violence and mental-health issues, was admitted to Delnor Community Hospital while in Kane County custody.
- Kane County Correctional Officer Shawn Loomis (and other deputies) repeatedly unshackled and left Salters unattended; Loomis allegedly removed a leg shackle, left Salters unrestrained for ~30 minutes, and after Salters grabbed Loomis’s handgun, Loomis fled and hid.
- Salters escaped, conducted a three-hour hostage situation on hospital premises during which nurses and patients were assaulted and one nurse was raped; a S.W.A.T. team ultimately shot and killed Salters (one bullet also struck a nurse).
- Plaintiffs: four nurses (Jane Does I–IV), two husbands (John Does I–II, loss of consortium), and two patients (Weiland, Chrones). Claims include §1983 substantive due process (state-created danger) against Loomis, negligence against Apex3 Security and Delnor Hospital, and indemnification against Kane County.
- Procedural posture: Defendants moved to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6). The court denied most motions to dismiss (Loomis and Apex3), granted dismissal in part of Kane County on spousal §1983 loss-of-consortium claims and related indemnification counts, and dismissed the patients’ negligence claim against Delnor Hospital as forfeited.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Loomis’s conduct satisfies the state-created danger test for a §1983 substantive due process claim | Loomis affirmatively created/increased danger by unshackling Salters, leaving him unrestrained, and fleeing after Salters grabbed the gun, proximately causing foreseeable harm to nearby nurses and patients | Defendants say Loomis’s conduct was mere inaction/inaction after escape and not an affirmative creation of danger; escape breaks causation | Court: Plaintiffs plausibly pled affirmative acts, proximate cause, and conscience-shocking conduct; state-created danger claim survives dismissal |
| Whether Loomis is entitled to qualified immunity | Plaintiffs say the law was clearly established that officers who increase risk to others violate the Constitution; Loomis should have known his conduct was unlawful | Loomis argues no controlling precedent on these facts (e.g., unshackling for bathroom use) so qualified immunity applies | Court: Denied dismissal on qualified immunity at pleading stage—existing circuit precedent made unlawfulness sufficiently clear |
| Whether spouses can recover §1983 loss-of-consortium | John Does assert derivative constitutional loss-of-consortium based on wives’ substantive due process injuries | Kane County urges dismissal: loss-of-consortium is not a constitutional deprivation under §1983 | Court: Dismissed §1983 loss-of-consortium claims and attendant indemnification counts (no constitutional right recognized) |
| Whether Apex3 Security owed a common-law duty to protect hospital staff/patients | Plaintiffs allege Apex3 voluntarily contracted to provide security and to monitor detainees, creating a voluntary-undertaking duty | Apex3 contends custody and responsibility for detainee safety rested exclusively with the county sheriff per the County Jail Act; no duty for private security | Court: Denied Apex3’s motion to dismiss; Plaintiffs plausibly alleged a voluntary undertaking that could create a duty (scope to be resolved later) |
| Whether Delnor Community Hospital is liable in negligence to Patient Plaintiffs | Patients alleged hospital negligence but offered no briefing on duty; they rely on co-plaintiffs’ arguments | Hospital moved to dismiss for lack of pleaded legal basis | Court: Granted dismissal of Count III as plaintiffs forfeited argument by failing to respond to hospital’s duty argument |
Key Cases Cited
- DeShaney v. Winnebago Cnty. Dep’t of Social Servs., 489 U.S. 189 (1989) (general rule: state’s failure to protect from private violence does not violate due process)
- County of Sacramento v. Lewis, 523 U.S. 833 (1998) (‘‘shocks the conscience’’ standard and differing culpability across contexts)
- Wilson-Trattner v. Campbell, 863 F.3d 589 (7th Cir. 2017) (state-created danger framework elements)
- Paine v. Cason, 678 F.3d 500 (7th Cir. 2012) (state actors who increase risk of harm may violate the Constitution)
- Buchanan-Moore v. County of Milwaukee, 570 F.3d 824 (7th Cir. 2009) (distinguishing liability where perpetrator was released versus escaped in custody)
- White v. Rochford, 592 F.2d 381 (7th Cir. 1979) (examples of state-created-danger where plaintiffs were safer before official action)
- D.C. v. Wesby, 138 S. Ct. 577 (2018) (qualified immunity inquiry: clearly established law requires sufficiently particular precedent)