Dukes v. Freeport Health Network Mem'l Hosp.
| Decision Date | 11 April 2022 |
| Docket Number | 3:19-cv-50189 |
| Parties | Shaquille Dukes, Credale Miles, and Marqwandrick Morrison, Plaintiffs, v. Freeport Health Network Memorial Hospital, Ryan Godsil, City of Freeport, Illinois, Jeff Zalaznik, Dan Moore, and Justin Holden, Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Northern District of Illinois |
Shaquille Dukes was a patient at FHN Memorial Hospital in Freeport Illinois. Co-Plaintiffs Credale Miles and Marqwandrick Morrison were visiting him. The three decided to go for a walk even though Dukes was still attached to an IV. Instead of walking around the hallways or even the hospital unit they decided to walk around the block. Ryan Godsil, an FHN security guard, saw Plaintiffs walking on the sidewalk while pulling an IV, an unusual sight. Thinking Plaintiffs were stealing hospital equipment, he intervened. (A reasonable person might think that there would be easier ways to swipe an IV other than being admitted to a hospital and having it attached to one's arm.) The situation only devolved from there leading to the arrest of Dukes, Miles, and Morrison. Almost everything was recorded on video, albeit from different vantage points.[1]
Based on the encounter with FHN security and the police that day, Dukes, Miles, and Morrison bring this suit. Against FHN Memorial and Ryan Godsil (“Hospital Defendants”), they claim negligence, false imprisonment, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. Against the City of Freeport, Sergeant Jeff Zalaznik, and Officers Dan Moore and Justin Holden (“City Defendants”), Plaintiffs allege false arrest, violations of the equal protection clause, and willful and wanton conduct in violation of state law. Plaintiffs also bring a Monell claim against the City of Freeport. Dukes also claims a failure to provide medical treatment and a violation of his substantive due process rights. All Defendants move the Court for summary judgment. For the reasons explained in detail later, the City Defendants' motion [59] is granted, and the Hospital Defendants' motion for summary judgment [60] is granted in part, with the negligence claim being dismissed without prejudice.
After review of the record on summary judgment, the Court realized that the state criminal charges remained pending in the Stephenson County Circuit Court.
This fact was not previously disclosed by the parties, so the Court sua sponte raised whether abstention was required under Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 (1971). Dkt. 80.
Abstention doctrines often require that federal courts decline to exercise federal jurisdiction “where doing so would intrude upon the independence of the state courts and their ability to resolve the cases before them.” J.B. v. Woodward, 997 F.3d 714, 721-22 (7th Cir. 2021) (quoting SKS & Assocs. Inc. v. Dart, 619 F.3d 674, 677 (7th Cir. 2010)). When exercising jurisdiction, federal courts must be cognizant of their decisions' effect on “principles of equity, comity, and federalism, ” which are “foundational to our federal constitutional structure.” Id. at 722. Abstention under Younger arises in three situations: when federal court litigation would interfere with (1) ongoing state criminal proceedings, (2) state-initiated civil proceedings that are “akin to criminal prosecutions, ” or (3) civil proceedings that implicate a state's interest in enforcing orders and judgments of its courts. Id. Though federal courts have independent duties to ensure they have the authority to adjudicate cases and controversies, they also have a “virtually unflagging” duty to exercise their jurisdiction. Ankenbrandt v. Richards, 504 U.S. 689, 705 (1992). Indeed, abstention should be the exception-not the rule. Sprint Communs., Inc. v. Jacobs, 571 U.S. 69, 73 (2013).
In this case, the Court's concern lies with the criminal proceedings in state court that stem from the arrests of Dukes, Miles, and Morrison; the same arrests giving rise to this case. That concern, however, does not implicate the Hospital Defendants, against whom Plaintiffs bring state-law claims that would not interfere with the state criminal proceedings.
Regarding the City Defendants, however, the Court became concerned that disposition of their motion for summary judgment may impinge on the federalism and comity concerns central to the holding in Younger. The Court ordered position papers and held a hearing, in which the parties indicated that the criminal proceedings were continued multiple times to allow this federal civil rights suit to conclude. The Court then sought and obtained consent to contact the circuit court judge (Judge James Hauser) directly.[2] Judge Hauser confirmed that the case had never been stayed, but that the parties had instead agreed to continue the proceedings multiple times in favor of the federal proceeding. Like all good judges, Judge Hauser simply wanted the cases to be resolved sooner rather than later. The Court then sought and obtained consent to contact the Stephenson County State's Attorney[3] and confirmed that the State consented to the resolution of this case first and waived its interests in federalism. See Kurtz Invs. Ltd. v. Vill. of Hinsdale, No. 15-cv-1245, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 88341, at *6-7 (N.D. Ill. July 7, 2015) (); see also Knowlton v. City of Wauwatosa, No. 20-cv-1660, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15615, at *7-8 (E.D. Wis. Jan. 28, 2022) (). So, the Court will not abstain.
The facts recited here are derived from the parties' Local Rule 56.1 statements of undisputed fact and, when necessary, from an analysis of the videos in the record.[4] Shaquille Dukes has suffered with asthma for most of his life. On June 8 and 9, 2019, Dukes was a patient at FHN Memorial Hospital in Freeport, Illinois, where he was treated for double pneumonia, acute bronchitis, and asthma exacerbation. Dukes had been released on June 8, but he returned by ambulance on June 9, and was accompanied by Co-Plaintiffs Marqwandrick Morrison and Credale Miles. After spending a few hours in the emergency department, Dukes was admitted to FHN Memorial Hospital and placed in the telemetry unit on the fourth floor, where emergency department patients are often assigned. Though that unit has the technology to remotely monitor its patients, Dukes was not connected to a monitor because he was an overflow patient.
Dukes was given intravenous (“IV”) saline fluids. The IV fluid bag was suspended on the top of an approximately six-foot medical pole, which was equipped with a pump and a monitor. Because the IV pole was on wheels, Dukes was able to walk with the IV attached to his arm by needle. So, Dukes, Miles, and Morrison decided to go for a walk outside, as they had done earlier in the day. They are adamant that the walk was sanctioned by the medical team. But the medical team says that no such authorization occurred, nor would it ever occur, and that walks are almost always (or maybe always) restricted to the floor on which the patient is assigned. Nonetheless, Dukes, Miles, and Morrison left the fourth floor, played a piano in the lobby, and then left the hospital to walk around the parking lot. But during this walk, they were stopped by Defendant Ryan Godsil, who was a security guard at the hospital.
Godsil understood that patients were not permitted to leave the hospital, and thought Dukes, Miles, and Morrison were attempting to steal hospital equipment, even though the IV was attached to Dukes' arm and administering fluids at the time.[5] So, Godsil confronted them about the suspected theft.[6] Plaintiffs found Godsil to be rude, abrasive, and essentially unprofessional. Godsil doesn't appear to have radioed the medical team to see if Dukes was allowed to walk around the block, but he was expected to approach any patients found outside and ensure they returned to the hospital. Plaintiffs took issue with Godsil's suspicions that they were stealing the IV. In Plaintiffs' minds, no reasonable security guard would think they would steal a device attached by needle to one of their arms. So, the situation unfortunately devolved. Voices were raised, curse words were exchanged, and because the situation was three on one, Godsil apparently felt threatened and radioed his fellow security guard, LeDarius Stewart, to call the police.[7] Stewart testified that when Godsil radioed him, he could hear yelling and obscene screaming in the background.
Once on the chaotic scene, the police officers began questioning Plaintiffs and the security guards. Officer Moore explained to Plaintiffs that the guards are tasked with protecting hospital equipment. Miles responded multiple times that there was no threat, and Dukes continued telling the officers that they were authorized to go for a walk and were clearly not stealing anything. Officer Moore told Miles that he was creating a scene by talking over the others and raising his voice. Moore then told Miles to stop talking and that he wouldn't ask him again. Miles responded, “What the fuck is you talking about?” Moore then physically grabbed Miles, put him in handcuffs, and placed him in the back of the police car.
Officer Fidecki attempted to de-escalate the situation by talking Dukes into returning to the hospital. But that attempt went out the window when Plaintiffs were told that Miles and Morrison were not welcome back inside. Dukes may have interpreted that to mean none of the three were welcome back,...
To continue reading
Request your trial