Lanman v. Hinson

• Decision Date: 10 August 2006
• Docket Number: No. 04-00122.,04-00122.
• Citation: 448 F.Supp.2d 844
• Parties: Patricia LANMAN, Plaintiff, v. Robert HINSON et al., Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Western District of Michigan

Page 844

448 F.Supp.2d 844

Patricia LANMAN, Plaintiff, v. Robert HINSON et al., Defendants.

No. 04-00122.

United States District Court, W.D. Michigan, Southern Division.

August 10, 2006.

COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED

Lloyd Johnson, Fieger Fieger Kenney & Johnson, Southfield, MI, for Plaintiff.

Mark E. Donnelly, MI Dept Attorney General (Employ, Elect, Torts) Public Employment, Elections and Torts Division, Lansing, MI, for Defendants.

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

CLELAND, District Judge.

Pending before the court is Defendants' "Motion for Summary Judgment," filed on August 5, 2005. The matter has been fully briefed, and the court conducted a hearing on the motion on May 24, 2006. For the reasons stated below, the court will deny the motion.

I. INTRODUCTION

On February 20, 2004, Plaintiff Patricia Lanman, personal representative of the estate of Eugene H. Lanman, initiated this action asserting various causes of action related to the death of Eugene Lanman (the "decedent") while admitted at the Kalamazoo Psychiatric Hospital.¹ Plaintiff's complaint was amended on February 27, 2004, and asserted four counts against Defendants:² Count I, Breach of Federal Statutory Protection Obligation Under 42 U.S.C. § 10801; Count II, Federal Statutory Civil Rights Violation Under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Against the Individual Defendants; Count III, Statutory Abuse and/or Neglect in Violation of State Law, Under Mich. Comp. Laws § 330.1722; and Count IV, Assault and Battery by Individual Defendants. Count I of Plaintiff's Amended Complaint was dismissed by stipulation on June 7, 2005.

In her Amended Complaint, Plaintiff seeks damages as a result of an altercation, which occurred on January 6, 2006, between the decedent and Defendants. Specifically, Plaintiff alleges that the decedent died as a result of physiological damage caused by Defendants when they restrained him with physical force and medication.

II. BACKGROUND

A. Admission to Kalamazoo Psychiatric Hospital

On January 5, 2002, the decedent was examined in the emergency room of Kalkaska Memorial Hospital by the Antrim/Kalkaska County Community Mental Health Department. (Kalkaska County Sheriff Records, Defs.' Ex. 3 at 2.) The decedent's medical chart from January 5 includes the following notations: "pt states he thinks his life is pointless — pt states he would hurt himself — pt unable to sleep — pt has (2) cliff. shoes on — wife states suicidal that pt was taking a lot of meds — neither know the meds — pt seen at several VA clinics . .." (Kalkaska Memorial Health Center Records, Defs.' Ex. 1 at 6.) The decedent was then transferred to Kalamazoo Psychiatric Hospital ("KPH") by the Kalkaska Sheriff's Office.³ (Def.'s Ex. 3 at 5.)

The decedent signed an "Adult Formal Voluntary Admission Application," pursuant to which he was voluntarily admitted to KPH around 10:00 p.m. on January 5, 2002. (Voluntary Admission Application, Pl.'s Ex. 1; Kalamazoo Psychiatric Hospital Death Summary, Pl.'s Ex. 8.) The form indicated that "the hospital may continue to hold [the decedent] for a period of up to 3 days, excluding Sundays and holidays, after [he] give[s] written notice of [his] intention to leave the hospital." (Pl.'s Ex. 1.)

The decedent, who had never before been a patient at KPH, was evaluated by the on-call psychiatrist, Dr. Sarat Kondapaneni. After conducting a psychiatric evaluation and a brief physical examination, Dr. Kondapaneni prescribed Celebrex for the decedent's back pain and Vasotec for his blood pressure. (Kondapaneni Dep. at 24-25, Defs.' Ex. 4.) Dr. Kondapaneni did not prescribe any psychotropic drugs pending receipt of further information. (Id. at 25.) Indeed, there is no material dispute that the decedent was not given any psychiatric treatment during the time he was at KPH. (Id.; Pl.'s Ex. 8 at 23.) The decedent was next taken to the Admissions Unit where he was further interviewed and assessed by the Psychiatric Nurse Manager, Barbara Ann DeKam. (DeKam Dep. at 14; Defs.' Ex. 5.) Ms. DeKam dispensed the Celebrex and the Vasotec to the decedent. (Id. at 44.) KPH did not assign the decedent a bedroom because, according to Ms. DeKam, patient rooms are not assigned on night shifts, especially if the patient is upset or uncooperative. (Id. at 46.) Instead, such patients are placed for observation in "quiet rooms,"⁴ which apparently have fewer stimuli than patient bedrooms. (Id.)

There does not appear to be any dispute regarding the events leading up to the decedent's struggle with Defendants. When the decedent arrived at KPH, he was "lethargic, mute, [and] mostly unresponsive." (Pl.'s Ex. 3.) Although he was ambulatory, he was also using a wheelchair "at times" because his legs were "shaking so badly." (Pl.'s Exs. 3 & 4.) The decedent stayed in the Admissions Unit for approximately twelve hours. (Pl.'s Ex. 8 at 22.) KPH's "Death Summary" explains the events leading up to the decedent's death as follows:

After his admission this patient was quiet and calm, but later during the middle of the night, he became restless and agitated, and he was agitated initially in the morning. He was sitting in the quiet room in the morning of 1/6/02, staring and not answering when addressed by staff. At 0930 hrs. in the morning of 1/6/02 staff was notified that Mr. Lanman was becoming increasingly more agitated, going into peers' rooms and refusing to leave; also, he was hitting his head on the doors. Staff attempted to redirect Mr. Lanman and talked to him in an effort to calm him, but his behavior continued. The on-call doctor was notified of the situation and consumer's behavior, and we ordered Ativan 2 mg IM for agitation at that time. The E-Z alarm was activated, and he was lying on the floor on his side with his arms flexed.

(Pl.'s Ex. 8 at 23.)

B. The Altercation

Defendants Mike Morey, James Siegfried, Robert Hinson, George White, Linda Price, Jean Prandine and Steven Bronsink are all resident care aides ("RCAs") and began work the morning of January 6, 2002 at 6:30 a.m. (Defs.' Mot. Br. at 4.) According to Defendant Prandine, RCAs generally try to "maintain [a] safe environment for the patients and report their needs, if necessary, to RNs, and help them with their daily living type things, laundry, bathing, that sort of thing." (Prandine Dep. at 5, Defs.' Ex. 10.) Defendant RCAs Siegfried, Morey, Price and Prandine were assigned to the Admissions Unit on the morning of January 6, 2002. (Defs.' Mot. Br. at 4.)

Defendants Julie Stiver and Edwina Koehn-Koldenhof are both registered nurses who also began work on January 6, 2002 at 6:30 a.m. (Id.) Registered nurses at KPH are responsible for "medication/education, medication/administration, documentation [and patient] assessments." (Koehn-Koldenhof Dep. at 5-6, Defs.' Ex. 7.)

There is no dispute that each of the individual Defendants were involved, in one way or another, in the altercation with the decedent. There does not appear to be any dispute that the altercation began when the decedent became more and more irritable until he eventually attacked or physically threatened Defendant Mike Morey. Defendant Morey, along with the remaining Defendants, responded to the decedent's behavior by restraining him, face down, as each of them held down a portion of his body. The parties dispute, however, the reasonableness of the decedent's continued restraint, and also the manner in which the decedent was restrained.

Plaintiff relies primarily on the testimony of Richard P. Hunter, a patient at KPH, to describe the altercation.⁵ Mr. Hunter was in a chair or a bench about five feet from where the altercation took place. (Hunter Dep. at 13, 31, Pl.'s Ex. 16.) Mr. Hunter testified that he saw at least six persons holding the decedent face down on the floor of the hospital.⁶ (Id. at 10.) According to Mr. Hunter, one of the staff persons was using his weight and pressure to hold the decedent down, including a knee on the decedent's back. (Id.) Mr. Hunter initially signed an affidavit in which he stated that he witnessed another staff member with his knee on the back of the decedent's neck, (Hunter Aff. at ¶ 7, Pl.'s Ex. 17), but during his deposition he testified that he did not remember that, (Hunter Dep. at 10, Pl.'s Ex. 16). He testified that other staff members had the decedent's ankles crossed and were pulling his feet toward the back of his head. (Id. at 11.) He further asserted that "a female nurse" gave the decedent a shot in the buttocks. (Id.) According to Mr. Hunter, the decedent was having "obvious difficulty breathing," and the hospital staff members ignored the decedent's pleas for them to get off so he could breathe. (Id. at 12.) Two or three minutes later, the decedent was "noticeably more calm," and five minutes later, "he wasn't resisting at all. He looked like he was passed out." (Id.) At that point, one of the hospital staff members noticed that the decedent wasn't breathing and the hospital staff slowly got off of him, rolled him on his back and began CPR. (Id.) Mr. Hunter did not hear any nurse telling the other staff members to get off of the decedent because he wasn't breathing. (Id. at 14.)

Mr. Hunter gave a similar account to the Kalamazoo police department when they arrived at the scene. The police report states:

Hunter was upset and felt staff caused the problem. Hunter advised he was in a room when he heard the emergency alarm. He advised he stepped out into the hall and observed approx. 8 staff members holding Lanman down. He advised Lanman was sort of on his side and was eventually rolled onto his stomach so he could be given an injection. Hunter felt Lanman could not breath[e] due to the way he was being held. He advised a staff member had a knee on either Lanman's head or neck and another staff member had a knee in his back. Hunter advised he saw no choke holds or blows delivered. He was not sure which staff member had knees on Lanman.

(Incident Report, Pl.'s Ex. 10 at...