Atteberry v. Nocona General Hosp.
| Decision Date | 03 November 2005 |
| Docket Number | No. 04-11330.,No. 04-11394.,No. 04-11390.,No. 04-11392.,No. 04-11395.,No. 04-11396.,No. 04-11397.,No. 04-11388.,No. 04-11387.,No. 04-11391.,04-11330.,04-11387.,04-11388.,04-11390.,04-11391.,04-11392.,04-11394.,04-11395.,04-11396.,04-11397. |
| Citation | 430 F.3d 245 |
| Parties | SELDEN ATTEBERRY, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of Barbara Atteberry; Stacy Atteberry; India Atteberry, Individually, and as Next Friend of Lydia Diane Weatherread (a/k/a Lydia Chapmon), a Minor Child; Cecilia Nmi Morgan, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of Donna Sue Curnutte; Charley Curnutte; Charley B. Curnutte; Kathy Weaver, As Representative of the Estate of William J. Griffin and as Attorney-in-Fact for Ellawean Griffin, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. NOCONA GENERAL HOSPITAL; et al., Defendants, Charles R. Norris; Barbara Jean Perry, Defendants-Appellants. Shirley Jeanette Holder, Individually and as Independent Executor of and Heir to the Estate of Jimmy Ray Holder, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Nocona General Hospital; et al., Defendants, Charles R. Norris; Barbara Jean Perry, Defendants-Appellants. Dois Wayne Jackson, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of Everett Ethridge Jackson; Yvonne W. Jackson, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. Nocona General Hospital; et al., Defendants, Charles R. Norris; Barbara Jean Perry, Defendants-Appellants. Billie J. Huggins, Individually and as Representative and Temporary Administrator of the Estate of Dorothy Jean Vanderburg; Estate of Dorothy Jean Vanderburg, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. Nocona General Hospital; et al., Defendants, Charles R. Norris; Barbara Jean Perry, Defendants-Appellants. Carol Jean James, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Nocona General Hospital; et al., Defendants, Charles R. Norris; Barbara Jean Perry, Defendants-Appellants. Betty Miller, Individually and as Executrix of the Estate of Alma Dixon, Deceased; Elaine Curtiss; David Dixon; Rick Dixon; Reene McCaffery; Gladys Bourge, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. Nocona General Hospital; et al., Defendants-Appellants. Harry Don Reid, Administrator of the Estate of Donnelly Reid, Deceased, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Nocona General Hospital; et al., Defendants, Charles R. Norris; Barbara Jean Perry, Defendants-Appellants. Barbara Gay Nichols Rector, Individually and as Legal Representative and Administrator of the Estate of J.T. Nichols; Clifford Nichols, Individually and as Heir to the Estate of J.T. Nichols; Michael Nichols, Individually and as Heir to the Estate of J.T. Nichols, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. Nocona General Hospital; et al., Defendants, Charles R. Norris; Barbara Jean Perry, Defendants-Appellants. Harold Gene Vanderburg, Individually and as Heir of the Estate of Dorothy Jean Vanderburg; Estate of Dorothy Jean Vanderburg, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. Nocona General Hospital; et al., Defendants, Charles R. Norris; Barbara Jean Perry, Defendants-Appellants. Charles Williams, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of John Walter Williams; Richard Williams, Individually and as Representative to the Estate of John Walter Williams; Dallas Williams, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of John Walter Williams, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. Nocona General Hospital; et al., Defendants, Charles R. Norris; Barbara Jean Perry, Defendants-Appellants. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit |
William A. Walsh, Law Office of William A. Walsh, Bowie, TX, for Selden, Stacy and India Atteberry. Morgan, Charley and Charley B. Curnette, Weaver, Holder, and Harold and Dorothy Vanderburg.
Aaron Craig Carter, Asst. Atty. Gen., Brian G. Jackson, Davis & Davis, Austin, TX, for Defendants-Appellants.
Robert Gregory Fitzgerald, Law Office of Greg Fitzgerald, Bedford, TX, for Holder.
Michael C. Freden, Charles Martin Noteboom, Noteboom & Parker, Hurst, TX, for Jackson and Weatherly.
Abhay Dhir, Dhir & Associates, Dallas, TX, for Huggins, Dorothy Vanderburg and Charles, Richard and Dallas Williams and Estate of John Williams.
Donna Jo Brown, Slack & Davis, Austin, TX, for Miller, Curtiss, David and Rick Dixon, McCaffery, Bourge and Reid.
Kenneth D. Dugan, Lamberth Law Firm, Rickwall, TX, for Rector and Clifford and Michael Nichols.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas.
Before KING, Chief Judge, and BARKSDALE and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
In this consolidated interlocutory appeal, defendants-appellants Charles R. Norris and Barbara Jean Perry challenge the district court's denial of their motions to dismiss. For the reasons stated below, we AFFIRM.
The plaintiffs-appellees (the "Plaintiffs") in this consolidated appeal are relatives or representatives of eleven deceased patients and one surviving minor patient (collectively, the "patients") at Nocona General Hospital ("Nocona" or the "Hospital"), a small hospital in Nocona, Texas. The Plaintiffs allege that Vickie Jackson ("Nurse Jackson"), a nurse at the Hospital, willfully deprived the patients of life and liberty interests by injecting them with a paralytic drug named Mivacron.1 The Plaintiffs claim that Nurse Jackson repeatedly stole Mivacron from hospital crash carts2 and used it to kill as many as twenty-two patients between November 2000 and February 2001.
Defendant-appellant Charles R. Norris ("Norris") is alleged to have been the Hospital Administrator at Nocona during the relevant time period, with general administrative and supervisory authority over the hospital staff and policymaking authority over drug storage and medical care. Defendant-appellant Barbara Jean Perry ("Perry") is alleged to have been the Director of Nursing at Nocona during the relevant time period, with supervisory and training authority over Nurse Jackson.
In January and February of 2003, the Plaintiffs filed suits in the Northern District of Texas against Nurse Jackson, the Hospital, Norris, Perry, and eleven other defendants. The Plaintiffs claimed Nurse Jackson's actions deprived the patients of their substantive due process rights to life and liberty. See U.S. CONST. amend. XIV; see also Doe v. Taylor Indep. Sch. Dist., 15 F.3d 443, 450-51 (5th Cir.1994) (en banc) () (internal citation omitted). The Plaintiffs claimed that the Hospital, Norris, Perry, and the other defendants were liable for these constitutional violations based on their conscious or deliberate indifference to the activities of Nurse Jackson, the disappearing Mivacron from the crash carts, and the ever-increasing number of unexplained deaths.
Beginning in April of 2003, multiple defendants (including Norris and Perry) filed motions to dismiss under FED.R.CIV. P. 12(b)(6), attacking the sufficiency of the Plaintiffs' pleadings and asserting the defense of qualified immunity. After consolidating the cases and sending them to a magistrate judge for pretrial management, the district court denied the defendants' motions to dismiss, adopting the magistrate judge's conclusion that the Plaintiffs had stated a § 1983 claim against some defendants, including Norris and Perry.3 The district court also declined to resolve the defendants' respective rights to qualified immunity, adopting the magistrate judge's recommendation that a "[d]etermination of the Qualified Immunity of these defendants should abide" the resolution of factual issues "upon completion of discovery, summary judgment or trial." Atteberry v. Nocona Gen. Hosp., 2004 WL 2002425, at *12 (N.D. Tex. Sept. 8, 2004) (mem.).
Defendants Norris and Perry appeal the denial of their 12(b)(6) motions to dismiss.4 We hold that the district court correctly concluded that qualified immunity will not protect the conduct alleged in the pleadings in this case, and we affirm the district court's denial of Norris's and Perry's 12(b)(6) motions to dismiss on the basis of qualified immunity.
"[A]n order denying qualified immunity, to the extent it turns on an `issue of law,' is immediately appealable." Behrens v. Pelletier, 516 U.S. 299, 311, 116 S.Ct. 834, 133 L.Ed.2d 773 (1996) (quoting Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511, 530, 105 S.Ct. 2806, 86 L.Ed.2d 411 (1985)). Our jurisdiction in this context extends to interlocutory appeals taken from both denials of motions to dismiss and denials of motions for summary judgment. See Behrens, 516 U.S. at 307, 116 S.Ct. 834 (). Specifically, the denial of a motion for dismissal on qualified immunity grounds falls into that
"small class" of district court decisions that, though short of final judgment, are immediately appealable because they "finally determine claims of right separable from, and collateral to, rights asserted in the action, too important to be denied review and too independent of the cause itself to require that appellate consideration be deferred until the whole case is adjudicated."
Behrens, 516 U.S. at 305, 116 S.Ct. 834 (quoting Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 546, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949)).
When reviewing a denial of qualified immunity on an interlocutory appeal, we are restricted to determinations "of question[s] of law" and "legal issues," and we do not consider "the correctness of the plaintiff's version of the facts." Mitchell, 472 U.S. at 528, 105 S.Ct. 2806. The "`essentially legal [immunity] question,'" which we treat as an entitlement "distinct from the merits" of the case, is appealable only "`to the extent that it turns on an issue of law . . . .'" Behrens, 516 U.S. at 306, 116 S.Ct. 834 (quoting Mitchell, 472 U.S. at 526, 530, 105 S.Ct. 2806) (omission in Behrens). Only these issues of law qualify as appealable "final decisions" before a...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lightell v. Walker
...or federal law; and (2) that the defendant was acting under the color of state law while doing so. See Atteberry v. Nocona Gen. Hosp. , 430 F.3d 245, 252–53 (5th Cir. 2005). Section 1983 reads, in pertinent part:Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or......
-
Leibowitz v. City of Mineola, Tex.
...Qualified immunity is only available to an official acting within the scope of his discretionary authority. Atteberry v. Nocona General Hosp., 430 F.3d 245, 257 (5th Cir.2005). Traditionally, the qualified immunity analysis has required a two-tier determination as to whether the plaintiff s......
-
Almond v. Tarver
...855, 55 L.Ed.2d 24 (1978); Wood v. Strickland, 420 U.S. 308, 322, 95 S.Ct. 992, 43 L.Ed.2d 214 (1975)); see Atteberry v. Nocona Gen. Hosp., 430 F.3d 245, 253 (5th Cir.2005); Estate of Davis ex rel. McCully v. City of N. Richland Hills, 406 F.3d 375, 380 (5th Cir.2005); Beltran v. City of El......
-
Jane Doe v. Covington County Sch. Dist.
...is lacking here. See City of Canton v. Harris, 489 U.S. 378, 386–90, 109 S.Ct. 1197, 103 L.Ed.2d 412 (1989); Atteberry v. Nocona Gen. Hosp., 430 F.3d 245, 254 (5th Cir.2005) (“[S]upervisors may be liable for constitutional violations committed by subordinate employees when supervisors act, ......