Cibulka v. City of Madison
| Decision Date | 23 March 2020 |
| Docket Number | 18-cv-537-jdp |
| Parties | Todd CIBULKA and Shelly Cibulka, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF MADISON, Dane County Sheriff's Office, Barrett Erwin, Corey Johnson, Jeff Ellis, Hector Rivera, Jose Martinez, Hannah Boulden, Trent Scalon, Jamar Gary, Mark Anderson, Brandi Anderson, Luke Deibele, Nathan Katzenmeyer, Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Western District of Wisconsin |
Bruce M. Davey, Lisa Claire Goldman, Davey & Goldman, Madison, WI, for Plaintiff.
Benjamin Andrew Sparks, Kyle R. Moore, Samuel C. Hall, Jr., Crivello Carlson, S.C., Milwaukee, WI, for Defendants City of Madison, Hector Rivera, Jose Martinez, Hannah Boulden, Trent Scalon, Jamar Gary.
Remzy Bitar, Arenz, Molter, Macy, Riffle & Larson, S.C., Matteo Reginato, Municipal Law & Litigation Group, S.C., Waukesha, WI, for Defendants Dane County Sheriff's Office, Mark Anderson, Brandi Anderson, Luke Deibele, Nathan Katzenmeyer.
Gesina S. Carson, Rachel Lee Bachhuber, Wisconsin Department of Justice, Madison, WI, for Defendants Barrett Erwin, Corey Johnson, Jeff Ellis.
Plaintiffs Todd Cibulka and Shelly Cibulka visited Madison, Wisconsin to attend a University of Wisconsin Badger's football game, after which they went drinking with friends. They became intoxicated and their daughter Emily Cibulka, a student at UW, met Todd and Shelly with the intention of driving them home. Emily was concerned and upset by her parents' behavior and called the police. Law enforcement officers from the City of Madison and University of Wisconsin responded. The interaction between the officers and the Cibulkas started out as a routine welfare check, but the interaction ended with Shelly being committed involuntarily to a detox facility, and with Todd being arrested, forced into a transport van, and held for more than four hours at Dane County jail. In this lawsuit, Todd and Shelly contend that officers from the City of Madison, University of Wisconsin, and Dane County violated their Fourth Amendment rights in numerous ways. The Cibulkas also contend that the city and county are liable for the officers' actions because municipal policies and practices caused the constitutional violations.
Before the court are motions for summary judgment filed by the university defendants, Dkt. 47, county defendants, Dkt. 55, city defendants, Dkt. 60, and plaintiffs, Dkt. 68. In considering defendants' motions, the court must view the evidence in the light most favorable to plaintiffs. But even with this perspective, plaintiffs have failed to show any violation of their constitutional rights, and defendants are entitled to qualified immunity on all plaintiffs' claims. Defendants' motions will be granted, plaintiffs' motion will be denied, and this case will be closed.
The following facts are undisputed unless otherwise noted.
Plaintiff Todd Cibulka and Shelly Cibulka live in Poynette, Wisconsin. Their daughter Emily Cibulka, who is not a party to this case, is a student at the University of Wisconsin in Madison.
Todd and Shelly have sued law enforcement officers from three agencies. Defendants Barrett Erwin, Corey Johnson, and Jeffrey Ellis are police officers with the University of Wisconsin Police Department (UWPD). Defendants Hector Rivera, Jose Martinez, Hannah Boulden, Trent Scanlon, and Jamar Gary are police officers with the City of Madison Police Department (MPD). Defendants Nathan Katzenmeyer, Mark Anderson, Brandi Anderson, and Luke Deibele are deputies with the Dane County Sheriff's Office.
On October 17, 2015, Todd and Shelly Cibulka traveled from their home in Poynette, Wisconsin to attend the University of Wisconsin Badgers football game in Madison, Wisconsin. They parked their car at a parking ramp near the capitol and walked to the stadium. Their daughter Emily was 18 years old and a freshman at UW at the time. Emily communicated with her parents with text messages and phone calls throughout the day. Emily, Todd, and Shelly planned to meet after the game and travel back to Poynette together.
At around 2 p.m., Todd and Shelly left the game and went to a bar. They stayed at the bar until approximately 7 p.m., drinking and socializing with friends. During those approximately four and one-half hours, Todd and Emily each consumed several alcoholic beverages. Emily had trouble communicating with Todd and Shelly while they were at the bar. By 6:30 p.m., Emily had grown impatient with Todd and Shelly. She had called them several times without success, and she wanted to leave Madison. Emily walked with a friend to the bar to find her parents.
At around 7:00 p.m., Emily and her friend arrived at the bar just as Todd and Shelly were exiting it. Todd and Shelly told Emily that they wanted to walk to their car, and they started walking west on Johnson Street toward the capitol. Emily noticed that Todd and Shelly had slurred speech, that Todd was swaying, and that both Todd and Shelly appeared to be too intoxicated to drive. Todd and Shelly were moving slowly, giggling, and telling Emily that they did not want to be rushed. Emily and her friend asked Todd for his keys, but he refused to give them up. Todd also would not tell Emily or her friend where the vehicle was parked. Emily was frustrated and upset by her parents' behavior.
Emily called a taxi, hoping that the taxi could take them all to Todd and Shelly's vehicle. When the taxi arrived, Todd and Shelly ignored Emily, refused to get in the taxi, and kept walking. Emily then called MPD's nonemergency number. Because Emily told the dispatcher that she was at Union South, which was outside of MPD's jurisdiction, the dispatcher transferred Emily's call to UWPD. Emily told a UWPD dispatcher that her parents had been drinking and were intoxicated, that she could not get them to ride in a cab, that they kept walking away from her, and that they were trying to get to their vehicle. The UWPD dispatcher told Emily that officers would be there shortly, and UWPD officers Erwin and Johnson were dispatched to Emily's location. The dispatcher reported on the radio:
Caller is very upset because parents have been drinking all day, are intox, and she's trying to drive them home. They are refusing to tell her where the truck is parked, and she is concerned her father will become more upset/start acting out. Caller would like an officer to meet her in front of U South on the Johnson side.
Meanwhile, Todd and Shelly continued walking along Johnson Street. Between five and ten minutes after Emily made her first call to MPD's nonemergency line, she called the nonemergency line again. Emily was concerned because her location had changed, no officers had arrived yet, and Todd and separated from the group to urinate between two houses. Emily told the dispatcher that she had called earlier and that no officers had arrived yet. MPD Officer Rivera was dispatched to perform a welfare check in response to Emily's second call. The MPD dispatcher reported that Emily was:
Walking on W. Johnson. Parents are intox and walking away from the caller. They keep walking down Johnson St, intox, stumbling all over. I had originally transferred Emily to UWPD as when she called, she was at Union South. They have units enroute. I updated UWPD as to the location. Now at Mills St, caller afraid her dad will fall into the street.
After Emily called the police the second time, Todd and Shelly sat down on a short retaining wall adjacent to Johnson Street.
UWPD Officer Erwin and MPD Officer Rivera arrived at the Cibulkas' location on Johnson Street at the same time. Because the Cibulkas were now in MPD jurisdiction, Rivera took lead as the primary officer. Rivera asked Erwin to stay and help. Erwin agreed to stay and assist because it was standard protocol at UWPD to send multiple officers when contacting intoxicated people. Rivera and Erwin spoke with Emily and her friend first. The officers introduced themselves and tried to determine what kind of help Emily needed. Emily was crying. She told the officers that her parents had been drinking, that they would not get into a cab, that they continued to walk along Johnson Street, and that she was getting anxious about the situation. Emily requested a ride to where her parents' car was parked.
UWPD Officer Johnson arrived shortly thereafter. He was with UWPD Officer Heather Banuelos, who was training Johnson. (Banuelos is not a defendant in this case.) Johnson asked Emily for a quick summary of what had happened. (Johnson's squad video recorded the conversation between Johnson and Emily.) Emily told Johnson that her parents wanted her to drive them home because they had been drinking. She said that she had never seen her dad like this, that her parents were stumbling and falling in the street, that they had refused to get into a taxi, that she did not know where the car was, and that her dad had refused to give her the keys. Based on Johnson's conversation with Emily, Johnson understood that Emily was worried about her parents' safety and was trying to figure out a way to get them home safely or to a hotel. Johnson told Emily that the officers could take her parents to their vehicle.
Meanwhile, Officer Erwin went to talk to Todd and Shelly, who were still sitting on the retaining wall. Todd told Erwin his name. Erwin spoke with Todd and Shelly for about ten minutes, mostly engaging in small talk about the football game and their daughter's dorm. He did not ask the Cibulkas for identification, did not accuse them of anything, and did not attempt to search them. Erwin noted that Todd and Shelly smelled strongly of alcohol, and that they had slurred speech and red, bloodshot eyes. Erwin had a difficult time communicating with Todd and Shelly because they were highly intoxicated.
Officer Rivera then attempted to talk with Todd and Shelly. Rivera wanted to find out where the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Adeyanju v. Richardson
... ... Maura FJ Whelan, State of Wisconsin Department of Justice, Warren D. Weinstein, Madison, WI, for Respondent. OPINION & ORDER WILLIAM M. CONLEY, District Judge Jonathon Adeyanju, an ... ...
-
Abdoo v. Sandusky Cnty. Sheriff
...for taking a drunk suspect down when he was near a busy road and at risk of falling into the street. Cibulka v. City of Madison, 448 F. Supp. 3d 1002, 1022 (W.D. Wisc. 2020) ("The undisputed evidence shows that the individual defendants used the type and amount of force that they thought wa......
-
Hokamp v. Miller
...chair is not excessive where the person being restrained had “refused orders to cooperate [and] stand up.” Cibulka v. City of Madison, 448 F.Supp.3d 1002, 1024 (W.D. Wis. 2020), aff'd, 992 F.3d 633 (7th Cir. 2021). In Cibulka, the plaintiff argued that excessive force was used on him when h......
-
Pierner-Lytge v. Hobbs
...Amendment" or that "existing precedent must place the lawfulness of the particular arrest ‘beyond debate.’ " Cibulka v. City of Madison , 448 F. Supp. 3d 1002, 1020 (W.D. Wis. 2020) (internal citations omitted).3 The Court need not address the parties’ discussion of the community caretaking ...