Cagle v. Southerland

Citation334 F.3d 980
Decision Date18 June 2003
Docket NumberNo. 02-13651.,No. 02-13131.,02-13131.,02-13651.
PartiesCynthia CAGLE, as personal representative of the Estate of Danny Ray Butler, deceased, bringing claims on behalf of Danny Ray Butler's heirs and survivors, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. David SUTHERLAND, in his individual capacity, Allen Cole, in his individual capacity, Defendants-Appellants. Cynthia Cagle, as personal representative of the Estate of Danny Ray Butler, deceased, bringing claims on behalf of Danny Ray Butler's heirs and survivors, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Winston County, a county in the State of Alabama, Winston County Commission, the governing body of Winston County, Defendants-Appellants.
CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (11th Circuit)

Kendrick Emerson Webb, Kelly Gallops Davidson, Gary L. Willford, Jr., Webb & Eley, P.C., Montgomery, AL, for Defendants-Appellants.

Patrick Mullins Lavette, Davenport & Lavette, Birmingham, AL, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama.

Before EDMONDSON, Chief Judge, and KRAVITCH and GIBSON*, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

This case arises from a suicide at a jail.

Cynthia Cagle, on behalf of the estate of her brother Danny Ray Butler, filed this section 1983 action against Winston County, the County Commission (collectively "Winston County" or "the County"), and various county officials in their individual capacities. Defendants moved for summary judgment. The district court denied summary judgment to Winston County, Sheriff David Sutherland and Jailer Allen Cole but granted it to the other defendants. Winston County, Sheriff Sutherland, and Jailer Cole appeal.1 Because none of defendants acted with deliberate indifference to Butler's constitutional rights, we vacate the denial of summary judgment and remand with instructions to grant summary judgment to the defendants.

BACKGROUND

This case arises out of the suicide of Donnie Ray Butler while he was detained in the Winston County Jail.

A. The Suicide

Butler was arrested by State Trooper Max Holt for DUI shortly after six o'clock in the evening on 23 September 1999. Butler had failed a field sobriety test and blew a .162 on an Alcosensor test. Butler was taken to Winston County Jail by Deputy Bryan Kirkpatrick while Trooper Holt waited for a tow truck.

During the ride to the jail, Butler told Deputy Kirkpatrick that Butler's girlfriend recently hanged herself at the Carbon Hill City Jail.2 When they arrived at the Winston County Jail, Officer Mark Taylor prepared to administer an intoxilizer test to Butler. Butler refused to take the test. Butler told Officer Taylor about Butler's friend's suicide and said that the Carbon Hill police department3 had done that to her.

After talking with Butler, Officer Taylor spoke to Jailer Cole. Officer Taylor told Jailer Cole that he should watch Butler and check on him frequently.4 Trooper Holt arrived at the jail and started working on the admissions paperwork. He asked Butler a series of questions on Butler's medical history and mental health. Butler answered all the questions and did not indicate a history of mental health problems. Butler did, however, tell Trooper Holt that if Butler had to stay in jail all night, he would kill himself.

Because Butler was intoxicated, the officers placed Butler in Cell One which was monitored by a video camera. Deputy Kirkpatrick went to the cell and removed items that he thought Butler could use to hurt himself, leaving only the bunk beds and a mattress pad. Meanwhile, because of Butler's suicide threat, Trooper Holt had Butler remove his belt and shoelaces and empty his pockets. Butler was placed in the cell by himself to prevent him from harming someone else or himself. Trooper Holt and Deputy Kirkpatrick asked the inmates in the adjacent cell to watch Butler: A peephole between the cells allowed the inmates to check on each other.

After completing the paperwork, Trooper Holt checked on Butler and left the jail. At 9:00 p.m., Jailer Cole performed a cell check and found nothing out of the ordinary. At 9:30 p.m., Deputy Kirkpatrick left the jail. When Deputy Kirkpatrick left the jail, Jailer Cole was the only county employee remaining at the jail. It was the policy of the Winston County Sheriff's Office to have only one person at the jail at night.5 At 10:46 p.m. Jailer Cole performed another cell check.6 Jailer Cole saw Butler "sitting upright against the wall with something hanging from the top bunk around his neck." Jailer Cole immediately went to call Deputy Slocumb and Officer Taylor for assistance.7

Officer Taylor arrived at the jail at 10:49, and Deputy Slocumb arrived shortly thereafter. Jailer Cole gave them the cell keys, and they proceeded to Butler's cell. Jailer Cole remained in the office and called an ambulance, Sheriff Sutherland, Chief Deputy Wright, Deputy Kirkpatrick, Trooper Holt and the District Attorney's office. When Officer Taylor reached the cell, he observed that Butler had hanged himself. Butler had used the elastic from his underwear to hang himself. Taylor checked for a pulse, found none, cut Butler down, checked again, and still found no pulse.

Deputy Slocumb observed that Butler was still warm but was cooler than normal to the touch. Neither Officer Taylor nor Deputy Slocumb attempted to resuscitate Butler. The paramedics arrived shortly afterward, and they also did not attempt to resuscitate Butler. Butler was pronounced dead.

B. The Praytor Order

In the early 1980's the Winston County Jail was involved in a jail-condition lawsuit, Praytor v. Townsend. The complaint focused on jail living conditions and did not mention suicide. In Praytor, the parties reached a settlement; and the district court entered a consent decree adopting the terms of the settlement: Praytor v. Townsend, CV-80-HM-250-S (N.D. Ala. June 8, 1984)[hereinafter Praytor order]. The Praytor order required, among other things, a minimum of two full-time personnel on duty between 5 p.m. and 8 a.m., adequate two-way communication, and hourly prisoner checks. Although both Sheriff Sutherland, who took office in 1995, and the current County Commissioner did not know about the Praytor order, it bound them as successors in interest. The Praytor court made no findings that the conditions in the Winston County Jail were ever unconstitutional or that the order was necessary to prevent constitutional violations.

C. This litigation

On 22 September 2000, Cagle brought this section 1983 action against Winston County, Alabama, the Winston County Commission, Sheriff Sutherland, Chief Deputy Wright, Deputy Kirkpatrick and Jailer Cole. Defendants moved for summary judgment. The district court granted Chief Deputy Wright's and Deputy Kirkpatrick's motions. The district court said that neither violated the Praytor order and that, therefore, they were entitled to qualified immunity.8 The district court denied summary judgment to the other defendants because it determined that they violated the mandates of the Praytor order. The district court apparently believed that the Praytor violation equated to a violation of Butler's constitutional rights. The district court also said the Praytor order clearly established the law, defeating Sheriff Sutherland's and Jailer Cole's claims of qualified immunity.

DISCUSSION

We review the denial of summary judgment de novo. LaChance v. Duffy's Draft House, Inc., 146 F.3d 832, 834 (11th Cir.1998). We view the facts in the light most favorable to the plaintiff. Dolihite v. Maughon ex rel. Videon, 74 F.3d 1027, 1040 (11th Cir.1996). A defendant's entitlement to qualified immunity is a question of law to be reviewed de novo. Id.

Because Butler was a pretrial detainee, his section 1983 claims are based on the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Belcher v. City of Foley Ala., 30 F.3d 1390, 1396 (11th Cir.1994). "[I]n a prisoner suicide case, to prevail under section 1983 for violation of substantive rights, under ... the ... fourteenth amendment, the plaintiff must show that the jail official displayed `deliberate indifference' to the prisoner's taking of his own life." Edwards v. Gilbert, 867 F.2d 1271, 1274-75 (11th Cir.1989). The deliberate indifference standard "requires a strong likelihood rather than a mere possibility that the self-infliction of harm will occur." Popham v. City of Talladega, 908 F.2d 1561, 1563 (11th Cir.1990) (emphasis added). "[T]he mere opportunity for suicide, without more, is clearly insufficient to impose liability on those charged with the care of prisoners." Tittle v. Jefferson County Comm'n, 10 F.3d 1535, 1540 (11th Cir.1994).

A. Winston County and the County Commission

To subject a county to liability under section 1983 the plaintiff must show that the constitutional violation occurred as a result of a county policy. Id. "[A] plaintiff must show that the municipal action was taken with the requisite degree of culpability and must demonstrate a direct causal link between the municipal action and the deprivation of federal rights." Bd. of the County Comm'rs of Bryan County v. Brown, 520 U.S. 397, 117 S.Ct. 1382, 1388, 137 L.Ed.2d 626 (1997). "[P]roof that a municipality's legislative body or authorized decisionmaker has intentionally deprived a plaintiff of a federally protected right necessarily establishes that the municipality acted culpably." Id. at 1389.

Cagle argued that the County acted with deliberate indifference when it failed to provide funding for an additional nighttime jailer despite Praytor's requirements and Sheriff Sutherland's requests. The district court determined a reasonable jury could conclude that this inaction was a county policy; that the policy violated the inmates' constitutional rights; and that the violation proximately caused Butler's death. The district court apparently reached this conclusion based on a belief that Praytor defined the constitutional rights of prisoners and detainees in...

To continue reading

Request your trial
148 cases
  • Spencer v. Pulido-Esparza
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of California
    • April 7, 2023
    ... ... Even if that decree ... was violated, that does not necessarily mean that Title II of ... the ADA was violated. Id. (citing see Cagle v ... Sutherland, 334 F.3d 980, 986-87 (9th Cir. 2003) ... (consent decrees often go beyond minimum legal ... requirements)) ... ...
  • Greene v. Cook Cnty. Sheriff's Office
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Illinois
    • February 4, 2015
    ...is true that a consent decree cannot, by itself, create a constitutional right enforceable through § 1983. See e.g. , Cagle v. Sutherland, 334 F.3d 980, 990 (11th Cir.2003) (consent decrees “cannot create or expand constitutional rights,” therefore “a section 1983 claim cannot be based sole......
  • McKnight v. Garriott
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Middle District of Florida
    • November 16, 2018
    ...Fla., 402 F.3d 1092, 1115 (11th Cir. 2005)). "A prison custodian is not the guarantor of a prisoner's safety." Cagle v. Sutherland, 334 F.3d 980, 989 (11th Cir. 2003) (quoting Popham, 908 F.2d at 1564)."[A]n official's failure to alleviate a significant risk that he should have perceived bu......
  • Dudley v. Singleton
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Alabama
    • December 17, 2020
    ...disregard "a strong likelihood rather than a mere possibility that the self-infliction of harm will occur." [ Cagle v. Sutherland , 334 F.3d 980, 985 (11th Cir. 2003) ] (emphasis in original) (quoting Popham v. City of Talladega, 908 F.2d 1561, 1563 (11th Cir. 1990) ). "[T]he mere opportuni......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
2 books & journal articles
  • Cagle v. Sutherland.
    • United States
    • Corrections Caselaw Quarterly No. 28, November 2003
    • November 1, 2003
    ...Appeals Court SUICIDE SUPERVISION Cagle v. Sutherland, 334 F.3d 980 (11th Cir. 2003). The personal representative of the estate of a pretrial detainee who hung himself in his cell brought a [section] 1983 action, alleging that officials failed to prevent his suicide. The district court deni......
  • Cagle v. Sutherland.
    • United States
    • Corrections Caselaw Quarterly No. 28, November 2003
    • November 1, 2003
    ...Appeals Court STAFFING Cagle v. Sutherland, 334 F.3d 980 (11th Cir. 2003). The personal representative of the estate of a pretrial detainee who hung himself in his cell brought a [section] 1983 action, alleging that officials failed to prevent his suicide. The district court denied summary ......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT