Davis v. La Salle Cnty.
| Decision Date | 11 June 2020 |
| Docket Number | 5-19-CV-00746-DAE-RBF |
| Parties | DYLAN B. DAVIS, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS INDEPENDENT ADMINISTRATOR OF, AND ON BEHALF OF, THE ESTATE OF JAMES DEAN DAVIS AND JAMES DEAN DAVIS' HEIR-AT-LAW, AND ON BEHALF OF PEGGY HEBERT, Plaintiff, v. LA SALLE COUNTY, TEXAS, BEATRICE MARIE HERNANDEZ, YVETTE MARIE MARTINEZ, FRANCISCA G. GARZA, ANA MARIA OLIVAREZ, SARAH ELIZABETH MURRAY, DOROTHY MARIE RAMIREZ, Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Western District of Texas |
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
This Report and Recommendation concerns the Rule 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint filed by Defendant La Salle County, Texas and individual Defendants Beatrice Marie Hernandez, Yvette Marie Martinez, Francisca G. Garza, Ana Maria Olivarez, Sarah Elizabeth Murray, and Dorothy Marie Ramirez. See Dkt. No. 47. The case was automatically referred pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and the docket management order entered on September 29, 2017, in the San Antonio Division of the Western District of Texas.1 Authority to enter this recommendation stems from 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B).
For the reasons set forth below, Defendants' Motion to Dismiss, Dkt. No. 47, should be DENIED. Plaintiff has plausibly alleged a claim for liability against La Salle County. Plaintiff has likewise plausibly alleged that Defendants proximately caused his father's death. Although Plaintiff has failed to state a viable claim under the Americans with Disabilities Act and Rehabilitation Act, he should get an opportunity to amend his complaint to remedy the pleading deficiencies discussed herein. Any such amended complaint, however, should also address the basis for Plaintiff's belief that he has standing to assert individual claims on behalf of decedent's mother Peggy Hebert. It should also aim to better comply with Rule 8(a)'s requirement that a complaint contain a "short and plain statement" of the claims for relief.
This denial-of-medical-care case brought by Plaintiff Dylan Davis seeks damages for the death of Plaintiff's father James Dean Davis, which occurred while James Davis was a pretrial detainee at the La Salle County Jail. Plaintiff Dylan Davis alleges that on or about 2:00 p.m. on July 31, 2017, James Davis—a known drug addict and alcoholic—was arrested and transported to the La Salle County Jail for a charge of theft. See Amend. Compl. ¶¶ 15, 20-21. The live Complaint alleges that at the time of his arrest and arrival at the jail, James Davis was visibly "ill to the point that he would die without medical treatment." See id. ¶ 18. Nevertheless, it is alleged, La Salle County jailers, Defendants Sergeant Yvette Martinez and Beatrice Hernandez,didn't properly screen Davis for medical and mental impairments, as was required by both La Salle County policy and the Texas Commission on Jail Standards ("TCJS"). See id. ¶¶ 17, 120. Had they done so, the Complaint alleges, Martinez and Hernandez would've realized Davis needed immediate medical assistance at a separate facility. Id. ¶ 19. Instead, Davis was placed in a holding cell, and Jail Administrator Dorothy Ramirez simply made Davis a sandwich to prevent him from "pass[ing] out." Id. ¶¶ 26, 29, 34.
From approximately 2:34 pm to 6:13 am on August 1, 2017, the Complaint alleges, each of the individual Defendants heard Davis moaning and screaming in pain from inside his holding cell. See id. ¶¶ 26, 34, 90, 97. Beginning at approximately 5:22 pm on July 31 and continuing throughout the next morning, Davis could be heard yelling for help and requesting an ambulance and to see a doctor. See id. ¶¶ 26, 32, 34, 52-53. Davis could also be seen vomiting in his holding cell, according to the Complaint, and his fellow prisoners even advised the jail staff on several occasions that Davis needed medical assistance. See id. ¶¶ 31, 43 78, 95, 97-98, 108.
Based on all of the above, Plaintiff contends Defendants either knew or should have known Davis was in severe distress and needed to go to a local hospital for immediate medical attention. See id. ¶¶ 19, 30-35, 44, 47-49, 52-53, 69, 78, 89, 92, 100. Rather than doing so, Plaintiff contends, Defendants ignored the physical manifestations of Davis's illness, ignored his repeated pleas for help, advising Davis that he simply needed to "sweat out what [he] ha[d]"; they allegedly even made fun of Davis's drug withdrawal. See id. Thus, according to the live Complaint, Defendants were deliberately indifferent to Davis's serious medical needs and acted in an objectively unreasonable manner. At approximately 6:30 am on August 1, 2017, Davis was discovered unresponsive. See id. ¶ 114. EMS personnel arrived at the scene a few minutes laterbut by that point it was too late. Davis was pronounced dead at approximately 6:50 am due to a methamphetamine overdose. See id. ¶¶ 24, 26, 122.
Plaintiff Dylan Davis initiated this action on June 25, 2019, against Defendant La Salle County and 6 individual jailers who worked at the La Salle County Jail on the dates in question. Plaintiff brings claims via § 1983 against Defendants for violations of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and the Rehabilitation Act. Plaintiff asserts these claims on his own behalf, as executor of his father's estate, and on behalf of James Dean Davis's mother and heir, Peggy Hebert. Plaintiff seeks damages for pain and anguish, medical and funeral expenses, and exemplary damages under § 1983, as well as pursuant to Texas's wrongful-death and survival statutes. See id. ¶ 193 ).
Defendants move to dismiss on the grounds that Plaintiff failed to plead sufficient facts to establish municipal liability or that Defendants proximately caused Davis's death. Defendants further allege that Plaintiff hasn't pled a cognizable claim for violation of the ADA or Rehabilitation Act.
In reviewing a motion to dismiss filed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), a court "accept[s] 'all well-pleaded facts as true, viewing them in the light most favorable to the plaintiff.'" New Orleans City v. Ambac Assur. Corp., 815 F.3d 196, 200 (5th Cir. 2016) (quoting In re Katrina Canal Breaches Litig., 495 F.3d 191, 205 (5th Cir. 2007)). But a court need "not credit conclusory allegations or allegations that merely restate the legal elements of a claim." Chhim v. Univ. of Tex. at Austin, 836 F.3d 467, 469 (5th Cir. 2016) (citing Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009)). Here, Defendants' motion purports to provide a "RelevantBackground and Summary" containing certain alleged facts. But it does so without citation to Plaintiff's Amended Complaint and in contradiction of facts as pled by Plaintiff. While Defendants' version of events might eventually be supported by the evidence, it also might not. At this juncture, the Court "will not look beyond the face of the pleadings to determine whether relief should be granted based on the alleged facts." Spivey v. Robertson, 197 F.3d 772, 774 (5th Cir. 1999).
"To survive a motion to dismiss, a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to 'state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.'" Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678 (quoting Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). "A claim has facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged." Id. Although a complaint "does not need detailed factual allegations," the "[f]actual allegations must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level." Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555. In other words, the allegations must show "more than a sheer possibility that a defendant has acted unlawfully." Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678.
Taking the allegations in the live Complaint as true, Plaintiff has alleged facts sufficient to survive La Salle County's Rule 12(b)(6) arguments on municipal liability and proximate cause. While Plaintiff's claims under the ADA and Rehabilitation Act aren't adequately pled, Plaintiff should be afforded an opportunity to cure the pleading deficiencies.
A. Municipal Liability. To state a claim upon which relief may be granted for municipal liability against a local government entity, like La Salle County, Plaintiff must allege facts that, if taken as true, reflect that an official custom, policy, or practice was the "movingforce" behind the alleged constitutional violations. E.g., Piotrowski v. City of Houston, 237 F.3d 567, 578 (5th Cir. 2001). Thus, "'a municipality cannot be held liable solely because it employs a tortfeasor—or, in other words, a municipality cannot be held liable under § 1983 on a respondeat superior theory.'" Doe v. Dallas Indep. Sch. Dist., 153 F.3d 211, 215 (5th Cir. 1998) (quoting Monell v. Dep't of Social Servs. of New York, 436 U.S. 658, 691 (1978)) (emphasis in original). "Official policy is ordinarily contained in duly promulgated policy statements, ordinances or regulations," but may also be evidenced by a custom that is "'a persistent, widespread practice of City officials or employees, which, although not authorized by officially adopted and promulgated policy, is so common and well-settled as to constitute a custom that fairly represents municipal policy.'" Piotrowski, 237 F.3d at 579 (quoting Webster v. City of Houston, 735 F.2d 838, 841 (5th Cir. 1983) (en banc)).
Here, Plaintiff has identified a number of county policies, practices, or customs that allegedly were the moving force behind James Davis's death, including:
To continue reading
Request your trial