Goines v. Valley Cmty. Servs. Bd.

• Decision Date: 04 May 2015
• Docket Number: Civil Action No. 5:14–cv–00065.
• Citation: 103 F.Supp.3d 791
• Parties: Gordon GOINES, Plaintiff, v. VALLEY COMMUNITY SERVICES BOARD, et al., Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Western District of Virginia

103 F.Supp.3d 791

Gordon GOINES, Plaintiff,

v.VALLEY COMMUNITY SERVICES BOARD, et al., Defendants.

Civil Action No. 5:14–cv–00065.

United States District Court, W.D. Virginia, Harrisonburg Division.

Signed May 4, 2015.

Timothy Lawrence Coffield, Keswick, VA, for Plaintiff.

Rosalie Pemberton Fessier, Timberlake Smith Thomas & Moses PC, Staunton, VA, Richard Hustis Milnor, Taylor Zunka Milnor & Carter Ltd., James Morton Bowling, IV, St. John Bowling Lawrence & Quagliana LLP, Charlottesville, VA, for Defendants.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

ELIZABETH K. DILLON, District Judge.

Pending before the court are five motions to dismiss, separately filed by all defendants in this case. Taken together, they seek dismissal of plaintiff Gordon Goines's complaint in its entirety. Goines has filed responses in opposition, and defendants have filed replies. The court heard oral argument on the motions, and they are now ripe for disposition. For the reasons set forth below, the motions will be granted.

I. Background

Goines's complaint alleges that he was unlawfully seized and detained by defendants, without probable cause and in violation of his rights under the Fourth, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution. He brings suit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983and also asserts a state-law claim of false imprisonment. He names as defendants three officers with the City of Waynesboro Police Department (defendants David Shaw, Robert Dean, and D.L. Williams), the Valley Community Services Board (VCSB), and Jenna Rhodes, who is employed by VCSB as an Emergency Services and Intake Clinician. He lists John Does 1–10 as additional defendants.

Accepting the well-pleaded, nonconclusory factual allegations in the complaint as true, as this court must when ruling on a motion to dismiss, see Aziz v. Alcolac, Inc.,658 F.3d 388, 391 (4th Cir.2011); Giarratano v. Johnson,521 F.3d 298, 302 (4th Cir.2008), the facts of the case are as follows:

Goines suffers from cerebellar ataxia, a neurological condition that manifests itself in physical ways. (Dkt. No. 1, Compl. ¶ 14.) For example, the disorder sometimes makes it “difficult for him to maintain a normal upright posture when walking, causing him to walk with an unsteady, lurching gait.” (Id.¶ 15.) As a result of the condition, he also speaks slowly and “his speech is sometimes slurred.” (Id.) He also struggles occasionally with fine motor skills such as writing and buttoning clothes. The effects of this condition are “purely physiological.” (Id.¶ 16.) It does not affect his cognitive functioning and he is mentally stable and has no “mental health issues.” (Id.)

Goines resides in an apartment complex in Waynesboro. In the weeks leading up to May 15, 2014, he noticed a problem with his cable service. His television would intermittently disconnect throughout the day and would freeze and produce extremely loud line noise and signals. Goines had notified his cable service provider, Comcast, about the problem. (Id.¶¶ 17–19.)

On May 15, 2014, Comcast sent a field tech to Goines's residence. The field tech examined the conjunction box outside his building and told Goines that one of his neighbors had spliced the cable running to Goines's apartment and was effectively stealing his cable. This was the cause of “the disconnections, loud line noise, and signals” that were coming through his television. (Id.¶ 19.)

The field tech told Goines he could not fix the problem without entering the neighbor's apartment and that he was not legally authorized to do so. Instead, the field tech recommended that Goines notify the police of the cable theft. (Id.¶¶ 20–21.)

That afternoon, Goines walked to the Waynesboro Police Department, which was across the street from his apartment, to report the cable theft. (Id.¶ 22.) Goines told Officer Feazell he was uncomfortable confronting his neighbor because he was unsure how the neighbor would react, and further told Feazell he “did not want to ‘get in a fight’ ” with the neighbor. Instead, he was reporting the theft to the police so that the police could handle it. (Id.¶ 23.)

Feazell contacted two other officers, Shaw and Dean. An incident report prepared later by Shaw (“the Incident Report”) reflects that Feazell advised Shaw and Dean that Goines “seemed to have some mental health issues going on over an issue with a television.” (Id.¶ 24.) Shaw and Dean approached Goines, and Shaw asked if they could go over to Goines's apartment so he could show them what was going on. (Id.¶ 25.) Goines agreed, and the two officers followed Goines to his apartment. (Id.11 25–26.)

According to the complaint, “Shaw and Dean apparently ignored or did not take the time to understand Goines' complaint.” (Id.¶ 26.) In the Incident Report, Shaw indicated that Goines told them “there was a clicking noise in the wall because someone outside was controlling his T.V.” (Id.) Neither the officers nor Goines turned on the television at any point, however, and the officers never heard the line noise and signals. (See id.¶ 27.) The Incident Report—which the court credits as accurate insofar as it does not conflict with the allegations in the complaint, seeSection II.B. herein—describes that Goines “tried to get us to hear the noises he was but we didn't hear them and told him that.” (Dkt. No. 12–3 at 3.)

Goines alleges that “[a]t no time did [he] make any threat to do harm to any person or to himself.” (Id.¶ 34.) The Incident Report, though, stated that Feazell told Shaw that Goines said he was “going to hurt somebody” (Dkt. No. 12–3 at 3), and Goines admits that when Officers Dean and Shaw asked him about fighting with his neighbors, he answered that he would “use his hands.” (Dkt. No. 29 at 15–16.) When the officers asked Goines how he would “use his hands,” Goines said “by punching.” (Id.) Goines describes this exchange as a hypothetical conversation.

The officers asked Goines if he “had any mental health issues” or “had a doctor for issues.” (Dkt. No. 1, ¶ 28.) Goines told them he did not. (Id.) Despite his response, Shaw and Dean concluded that Goines was “having irrational issues and hearing things.” (Id.¶ 29.) So Shaw asked Goines if he “wanted to talk to someone.” (Id.¶ 30.) By his question, Shaw intended to ask whether Goines wanted to talk to a mental health professional. Indeed, Goines does not dispute the accuracy of the Incident Report on this point, wherein Officer Shaw reported that he “told [Goines] there was concern for his and others safety and he needed to go talk to someone about all these problems. He agreed to go with Officer Dean to go speak to VCSB.” (Dkt. No. 12–3 at 3.) Goines claims, however, that he understood Shaw to be asking if he wanted to talk to someone about the cable theft. In any event, Goines agreed to go with the officers. (Dkt. No. 1, ¶¶ 28–31.)

At that point, Shaw and Dean handcuffed Goines, took him back to the police station, and placed him into the caged portion of a police vehicle in the parking lot. (Id.¶ 32.) Goines told Dean he wanted to go home and asked Shaw and Dean to let him out of the car, but Dean told Goines “that wasn't an option.”¹(Id.¶ 33.) Goines's counsel agreed at argument that there may have been consent at the time Goines left the house with the officers, albeit consent based on a misunderstanding. But at the point that Goines stated he wanted to go home and the officers would not allow him, a seizure clearly occurred and had to be supported by probable cause.

Goines alleges that, upon information and belief, Dean or Shaw then placed a call to one of the John Doe defendants, who encouraged Shaw and Dean to take Goines into custody under Virginia laws involving mental-health evaluations. Dean and Shaw transported Goines against his will to Augusta County Medical Center [ACMC].²(Id.¶¶ 35, 37.)

Dean or Shaw then placed a phone call to one of the John Does and requested a background check on Goines, which revealed that Goines had no criminal record, but that he owned a registered firearm. (Id.¶ 38.) In response to questioning from Dean or Shaw, Goines explained he purchased the firearm in or around 2010 when he worked as a security guard, and that he kept the firearm locked in a safe at his residence. (Id.) Goines also told them that if there was a problem with the firearm, they could have it, and that he simply wanted to go home. (Id.¶ 39.) Goines alleges that he repeatedly stated to Dean and others at the hospital that he wanted to go home. (Id.¶ 40.) He claims that there was no legitimate or lawful basis to seize, arrest, or detain him.

At around 6:00 p.m., defendant Jenna Rhodes began an evaluation of Goines, acting as the designee and employee of VCSB. At approximately 6:15 p.m., Defendants John Doe 1—identified in the Incident Report as Officer Scott—and Williams came to the hospital and relieved Dean. (Id.¶¶ 45–46.)

At some point during Goines's detention at ACMC, Rhodes or a John Doe filed a petition seeking Goines's temporary detention and involuntary admission to a mental health facility pursuant to Virginia Code § 37.2–809.³(Id.¶ 47.) Goines refers to the twelve-page document attached to his complaint as the May 15 Petition, but it is actually titled “Preadmission Screening Report” (Screening Report). According to the complaint, the Screening Report alleged “(i) that Goines had a mental illness and was in need of hospitalization or treatment; (ii) that there existed a substantial likelihood that, as a result of mental illness, Goines would, in the near future, cause serious physical harm to others ...; and (iii) that Goines would suffer serious harm due to his lack of capacity to protect himself from harm or provide for his own basic human needs.” (Id.¶ 49, and Ex. A.)

The Screening Report was completed by Rhodes and included a “diagnosis” that Goines had a “Psychotic DisorderNOS (298.9).”⁴The complaint notes that “Rhodes has a master's degree in education” and “was not a licensed medical professional, clinical psychologist, or clinical social...