Gladden v. Richbourg, 12–3918.

Decision Date23 July 2014
Docket NumberNo. 12–3918.,12–3918.
Citation759 F.3d 960
PartiesJames GLADDEN, Jr., Individually and as Special Administrator of the Estate of Bradley Scott Gladden, deceased, Plaintiff–Appellant v. Kenneth RICHBOURG, Officer, individually and in his official capacity as North Little Rock Police Officer; Eric Van Imhoff, Officer, individually and in his official capacity as North Little Rock Police Officer; Danny Bradley, Chief, in his official capacity as Chief of the North Little Rock Police Department, Defendants–Appellees.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit

759 F.3d 960

James GLADDEN, Jr., Individually and as Special Administrator of the Estate of Bradley Scott Gladden, deceased, Plaintiff–Appellant
v.
Kenneth RICHBOURG, Officer, individually and in his official capacity as North Little Rock Police Officer; Eric Van Imhoff, Officer, individually and in his official capacity as North Little Rock Police Officer; Danny Bradley, Chief, in his official capacity as Chief of the North Little Rock Police Department, Defendants–Appellees.

No. 12–3918.

United States Court of Appeals,
Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: Jan. 13, 2014.
Filed: July 23, 2014.


[759 F.3d 961]


Anthony Bryce Brewer, argued, North Little Rock, AR (Michael Darren O'Quinn, on the brief, Little Rock, AR), for Plaintiff–Appellant.

John Lennon Wilkerson, argued, North Little Rock, AR, for Defendants–Appellees.


Before WOLLMAN and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges, and WEBBER, District Judge.

WOLLMAN, Circuit Judge.

Bradley Scott Gladden died of hypothermia after two police officers, Kenneth Richbourg and Eric Van Imhoff, transported Gladden from a restaurant in North Little Rock, Arkansas, to an isolated off-ramp outside the city. Gladden had asked the officers for a ride to his sister's house in the next county, but the officers instead left Gladden at the county line, which marked the edge of their jurisdiction, and instructed Gladden to seek assistance at a nearby factory. James Gladden (hereinafter James), both individually and as the administrator of Bradley Gladden's estate, sued the officers in their individual and

[759 F.3d 962]

official capacities and Police Chief Danny Bradley in his official capacity for abridging Gladden's federal constitutional rights in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983, abridging Gladden's state constitutional rights in violation of the Arkansas Civil Rights Act, Ark.Code Ann. § 16–123–101 et seq., and committing the tort of wrongful death under the Arkansas Wrongful Death Act, Ark.Code Ann. § 16–62–101 et seq. The district court 1 granted qualified immunity to the officers, granted official immunity to all three defendants, and dismissed the state-law claims. We affirm.

I.

A little after midnight on December 12, 2010, Officer Richbourg responded to a 911 call from the Waffle House, a restaurant near Protho Junction in North Little Rock. The dispatcher informed Richbourg that “a white male wearing a beige jacket and jeans [had been] inside the business for about two hours refusing to leave.” When Richbourg arrived, he saw Gladden, who matched the dispatcher's description. Security camera footage from inside the Waffle House shows that Gladden was wearing jeans, a blue striped shirt, a beige coat with a plaid lining, and tennis shoes. Gladden smelled of alcohol and had cuts on his face. He looked like he had been beaten up.

Gladden complied with Richbourg's request to accompany him outside the restaurant. Richbourg conducted a pat-down search of Gladden and found a small, unopened bottle of whiskey in Gladden's pocket, which he placed on the ground. Richbourg inquired about the cuts on Gladden's face, and Gladden explained that he had been attacked by two men at a gas station earlier that evening. Gladden declined Richbourg's offer to call an ambulance. Richbourg then checked to see if there were any outstanding warrants for Gladden and learned that there were none.

Around this time, Officer Imhoff arrived to assist Richbourg. Imhoff was familiar with Gladden, having on at least two previous occasions called emergency medical services on Gladden's behalf after determining that Gladden was excessively intoxicated. On another occasion, Imhoff had given Gladden a ride to the Lonoke County line on Interstate 40 and left Gladden at a place Gladden said was a half mile away from a family member's house. According to Imhoff, Gladden had asked to be let out a half mile away from the house because he did not want a police cruiser to approach the residence.

Gladden was also the subject of a departmental memorandum written by Sergeant Rick Bibb of the North Little Rock Police Department. Bibb's memorandum requested that any officer who arrested Gladden for public intoxication file a detailed report for use in civilly committing Gladden for rehabilitative purposes. Both Imhoff and Richbourg had received this memorandum.

On this particular night, it appeared to the officers that Gladden was only mildly intoxicated. According to both officers, Gladden was not slurring his speech and appeared coherent. Four Waffle House employees testified that Gladden appeared intoxicated but not excessively so. Imhoff, who, as recounted above, had seen Gladden in a severely intoxicated state, testified that “[i]f I had to guess just from the times I've normally dealt with him, he'd probably only had maybe a little bit of alcohol and I'm not sure as to how recent.” Gladden told the officers that he was not drunk and asked them not to take him to

[759 F.3d 963]

jail. The officers asked Gladden why he was at the Waffle House, to which Gladden replied that he was looking for a ride to his sister's house in Lonoke. Gladden then asked the officers if they could take him there. Richbourg responded that neither he nor Imhoff could take him all the way to Lonoke because it was “outside [their] area,” but Richbourg offered to take Gladden to the Lonoke County line. Gladden agreed.

Gladden asked Imhoff if he could use Imhoff's phone to call his sister so that she could pick him up at the county line. Imhoff told Gladden that he would have to use the phone inside the Waffle House. Unaware of this exchange, Richbourg told Gladden to pick up his whiskey bottle and get in the back of his squad car if he wanted a ride. Gladden then retrieved the bottle and entered the back seat of Richbourg's squad car without having called his sister. Richbourg and Gladden departed the Waffle House and set off towards the county line on Interstate 40 at approximately 12:27 a.m.

Richbourg initially intended to drop Gladden off at the Kerr Road exit near the Lonoke County line. But the Kerr Road exit was isolated and dark, and Richbourg felt it would be unsafe to leave Gladden there. Richbourg instead proceeded to the next exit, the Remington Road exit, and let Gladden out there.

The temperature outside was between 25 and 35 degrees Fahrenheit when Gladden exited Richbourg's squad car at the Remington Road exit. The lights of the nearby Remington Arms factory shone a few hundred feet away. Aside from the factory the area was completely undeveloped.

Gladden asked Richbourg to direct him to the nearest gas station. Richbourg was unsure where the nearest gas station was, but he told Gladden to seek assistance at a guard station at the factory. The station itself was not visible from the Remington Road exit; it lay on the opposite end of a fenced-in parking lot, about a thousand feet from where Gladden stood as the crow flies, and about a half mile by foot. A guard on duty that night testified by affidavit that the guard station was operational and that the guards would have assisted Gladden had he approached the station. After Gladden started walking in the direction of the guard station, Richbourg departed the intersection and returned to North Little Rock.

Gladden was found dead at approximately 10:37 a.m. the next morning. The cause of death was environmental hypothermia, with intoxication as a contributing factor (his blood alcohol content was .34). Gladden's body was found in the grass at a closed weigh station along Interstate 40, about a half mile from where Richbourg had left him, in the opposite direction of the factory.

James Gladden's action alleged that Officers Richbourg and Imhoff violated 42 U.S.C. § 1983 by abridging Bradley Gladden's clearly established constitutional rights under the Fourth, Fifth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. Further, the suit asserted that the North Little Rock Police Department's custom of transporting intoxicated persons violated 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for the same reasons. It also alleged that the acts of the officers and the customs of the police department violated the Arkansas Civil Rights Act, Ark.Code Ann. § 16–123–101 et seq., and that the officers had committed the tort of wrongful death under Ark.Code Ann. § 16–62–101 et seq. The district court granted summary judgment to the defendants after determining that the officers were entitled to qualified immunity and that all three defendants were entitled to official immunity. The district court then granted summary

[759 F.3d 964]

judgment to the defendants on James's state law claims after concluding that the resolution of his federal claims necessarily disposed of his state law claims. See Island v. Buena Vista Resort, 352 Ark. 548, 103 S.W.3d 671, 675–76 (2003); Davis v. Fulton County, Ark., 884 F.Supp. 1245, 1262 (E.D.Ark.1995).

II.

“We review a district court's qualified immunity determination on summary judgment de novo, viewing the record in the light most favorable to [the plaintiff] and drawing all reasonable inferences in [his] favor.” Shannon v. Koehler, 616 F.3d 855, 861–62 (8th Cir.2010) (alterations in original) (quoting Langford v. Norris, 614 F.3d 445, 459 (8th Cir.2010)); see also Tolan v. Cotton, ––– U.S. ––––, 134 S.Ct. 1861, 1863, 188 L.Ed.2d 895 (2014)(per curiam). Summary judgment is appropriate when there is “no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(a).

The defense of qualified immunity shields government officials from most tort suits. More specifically, “government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818, 102 S.Ct. 2727, 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982). There is no dispute here that the officers were...

To continue reading

Request your trial
43 cases
  • Dundon v. Kirchmeier
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of North Dakota
    • December 29, 2021
    ...police officer based on facts available to the officer at the time of the alleged constitutional violation. Gladden v. Richbourg, 759 F.3d 960, 964 (8th Cir. 2014). If "based on those facts, the officer reasonably failed to comprehend that he was violating a person's clearly established con......
  • Parsons v. McCann
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Nebraska
    • September 30, 2015
    ...custom is "made by its lawmakers or by those whose edicts or acts may fairly be said to represent official policy." Gladden v. Richbourg, 759 F.3d 960, 968 (8th Cir.2014). As discussed above with regard to the City of Omaha, Plaintiffs' allegations are sufficient to draw an inference that D......
  • Quraishi v. St. Charles Cnty.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit
    • January 28, 2021
    ...where most of the protests occurred).Anderson insists at length that the material facts are those he perceived. See Gladden v. Richbourg , 759 F.3d 960, 964 (8th Cir. 2014) (stating qualified immunity is evaluated "from the perspective of a reasonable police officer based on facts available......
  • Davis v. Dawson
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit
    • May 10, 2022
    ...U.S. 511, 530, 105 S.Ct. 2806, 86 L.Ed.2d 411 (1985). This court reviews de novo the denial of qualified immunity. Gladden v. Richbourg , 759 F.3d 960, 964 (8th Cir. 2014).II. Officers are "entitled to qualified immunity unless (1) the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to [the pl......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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