Wittner Ex Rel. Wittner v. Banner Health, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 12875

Ian Wittner died after being injected with Haldol during a 72-hour involuntary hold at North Colorado Medical Center.
Parents sued Banner Health (NCMC), Dr. Ruegg, and Nurse Ponder under § 1983 and asserted state-law tort claims.
District court granted summary judgment on the § 1983 claim, ruling the defendants were not state actors; denied remand of state claims.
Defendants cross-appealed the Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal of the § 1983 claim; plaintiffs challenged the denial of a 59(e) motion to retain jurisdiction over state claims.
Court held private hospital staff were not state actors under the nexus, public-function, joint-action, or symbiotic-relationship tests; relied on Pino v. Higgs.
Court vacated summary judgment, reversed denial of 12(b)(6), affirmed denial of 59(e), and remanded with instructions to enter judgment for defendants consistent with the opinion.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether private hospital and staff are state actors under § 1983	Wittner relies on state involvement via involuntary holds to transform private actors into state actors.	Colorado’s scheme does not coercively compel private actors or make them state actors.	Not state actors; § 1983 claim dismissed.
Whether the court correctly analyzed state-action theory (nexus/public function/joint action/symbiotic relationship) under Pino	Colorado framework and funding convert private actors into state actors.	No coercion, no exclusive public function, no joint action, nor symbiotic entwinement established.	Court affirmed that none of the tests confer state action here.
Whether district court erred in not remanding state-law claims and in handling § 1367 supplemental jurisdiction	Remand of state claims would avoid prejudice and preserve state court access.	No removal of state claims occurred; remand not proper.	Remand instruction not required; federal-court dismissal of the § 1983 claim stands, with state claims addressed as appropriate.

Brentwood Acad. v. Tenn. Secondary Sch. Athletic Ass'n, 531 U.S. 288 (U.S. 2001) (coercion/entwinement concepts in state-action analysis)
Blum v. Yaretsky, 457 U.S. 991 (U.S. 1982) (private decisions not state action absent coercive state power)
Pino v. Higgs, 75 F.3d 1461 (10th Cir. 1996) (private physician not state actor under involuntary-hold statute)
Johnson v. Rodriguez, 293 F.3d 1196 (10th Cir. 2002) (flexible, case-specific approach to state action)
Spencer v. Lee, 864 F.2d 1376 (7th Cir. 1989) (history of involuntary commitment not an exclusive public function)
Harvey v. Harvey, 949 F.2d 1127 (11th Cir. 1992) (involuntary commitment not necessarily state action)
Milonas v. Williams, 691 F.2d 931 (10th Cir. 1982) (symbiotic relationship/entwinement examined in state action)
Jackson v. Metro. Edison Co., 419 U.S. 345 (U.S. 1974) (regulation without coercive control does not establish state action)
West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42 (U.S. 1988) (public-function/public-role analysis in privity of state action)
Gallagher v. Neil Young Freedom Concert, 49 F.3d 1442 (10th Cir. 1995) (flexible approach; consider facts of each case)
Town of Castle Rock v. Gonzales, 545 U.S. 748 (U.S. 2005) (statutory obligations; enforceability; not automatic § 1983 liability)