Lawhon v. Edwards

• Decision Date: 10 August 2020
• Docket Number: Civil Action No. 3:19-CV-924-HEH
• Citation: 477 F.Supp.3d 428
• Parties: Angela L. LAWHON, as Administrator of the Estate of Joshua L. Lawhon, Plaintiff, v. John EDWARDS, et al., Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Virginia

477 F.Supp.3d 428

Angela L. LAWHON, as Administrator of the Estate of Joshua L. Lawhon, Plaintiff,

v.John EDWARDS, et al., Defendants.

Civil Action No. 3:19-CV-924-HEH

United States District Court, E.D. Virginia, Richmond Division.

Signed August 10, 2020

Isaac Abraham McBeth, Jonathan Eric Halperin, Halperin Law Center, Glen Allen, VA, for Plaintiff.

Mark Charles Nanavati, Gary Christopher Jones, Jr., Sinnott, Nuckols & Logan PC, Midlothian, VA, for Defendants.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

(Defendants' Motions to Dismiss)

Henry E. Hudson, Senior United States District Judge

This civil rights and wrongful death action arises from the response of two Richmond City police officers, later accompanied by two Richmond Ambulance Authority ("RAA") medical technicians, to an individual in distress on January 16, 2018. According to the Complaint, Shaunna Tunstall ("Tunstall") called 911 in an attempt to secure medical assistance for her roommate, Joshua L. Lawhon ("Lawhon"). Based on Lawhon's presentation and Tunstall's explanation that Lawhon had been kicking and screaming on the floor, Officer John Edwards ("Officer Edwards") decided to transport Lawhon to a hospital for medical evaluation. In fact, Tunstall encouraged the officers to remove Lawhon from the residence, stating "[h]e needs to go out of here right now."¹ (Compl. ¶ 24, ECF No. 1.)

During the course of restraining Lawhon, he lost consciousness and allegedly died from positional asphyxia

, as a result of the force used to restrain him.² Subsequently, Angela L. Lawhon, as Administrator of the Estate of Joshua L. Lawhon ("Plaintiff"), filed this lawsuit seeking damages for wrongful death, false arrest, battery, and violations of Lawhon's civil rights.³

This lawsuit is presently before the Court on Motions to Dismiss (ECF Nos. 9, 16, 18) filed by Defendants Officer Edwards, Lashaun Turner ("Officer Turner"), Alexander Mayes ("Mayes"), and Christopher Tenley ("Tenley") (collectively referred to as "Defendants"). They contend that their actions in response to what appeared to be a medical emergency are shielded by qualified immunity, good faith immunity, or state statute. Alternatively, Defendants argue that Plaintiff's claims lack factual support.

As required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), this Court's analysis at this stage is both informed and constrained by the four comers of the Complaint and documents incorporated therein. Both sides have submitted memoranda supporting their respective positions, and the Court heard oral argument on July 30, 2020. For the reasons that follow, Defendants' Motions will be granted in part and denied in part.

I. BACKGROUND

Viewed in the light most favorable to Plaintiff, the facts are construed as follows for the purpose of resolving the Motions to Dismiss. The decedent, Joshua Lawhon, was a 32-year-old man with a prior history of paranoid schizophrenia

. (Compl. ¶ 15.) On the evening of January 16, 2018, Lawhon's roommate—Tunstall—called the Richmond City Police "in an attempt to secure medical care" for Lawhon, and advised the dispatcher that Lawhon had fallen down and hit his nose, was bleeding, and needed to be restrained and transported to a hospital. (Id. ¶¶ 15–16.) As a result, the Defendant-officers were dispatched to the scene,⁴ and they arrived at a house in clear disarray.⁵ (Id. ¶ 17.) They immediately encountered Lawhon, who was conscious and responsive, but "had blood on his face and shirt from previously falling and hitting his nose on a table." (Id. ¶ 19.) He greeted the officers by saying, "I was just having a real bad day" and "I took some drugs that I shouldn't have that sent me to the pit of hell." (Id. ) Officer Edwards told Lawhon that they needed to get him to the hospital. (Id. ) Lawhon adamantly declined. (Id. ) Officer Edwards admonished Lawhon that if he did not want to go, "I'm going to have to medically ECO you."⁶ (Id. )

As the conversation progressed, Lawhon became increasingly agitated. Tunstall informed Officer Edwards that Lawhon had earlier fallen on the floor and had been kicking and screaming. (Id. ¶ 20.) Lawhon further stated that he had fallen on the floor on purpose. (Officer John Edwards' Body-Worn Camera Video, Compl. Ex. C, at 2:39–2:50, ECF No. 1-4.) Tunstall also advised the officers that Lawhon had taken "[a] lot of" the prescription medication, Wellbutrin

. (Compl. ¶¶ 21, 23.) Both Lawhon and Tunstall initially informed the officers that there were no weapons in the house, though Tunstall quickly clarified that she did not know. (Id. ¶ 21; Compl. Ex. C, at 4:44–4:51.) When Officer Edwards reiterated to Lawhon that he needed to go to the hospital or have an ambulance respond, Lawhon declined. "I'm fine, guys. I was just messed up for a little while." (Compl. ¶ 22.) He then ordered the police officers to leave the premises. (Id. ¶ 23.)

At that point, Emergency Medical Service ("EMS") technicians ("EMTs") Mayes and Tenley arrived. (Id. ) Both Mayes and Tenley are employed by the RAA. (Id. ¶¶ 7–8.) Officer Edwards briefed the EMS personnel and pointed out that Lawhon had noticeable, self-induced injuries—as confirmed by Tunstall—and in the officer's opinion, needed EMS personnel to take a look at him. (Id. ¶ 23.) At that point, Lawhon reiterated that he was not going to the hospital. (Id. ) Officer Edwards then informed Lawhon that he was going to remove him from the premises under a medical ECO because he was a danger to himself and others. (Id. )

Mayes then asked Lawhon a series of questions, such as his name and the address of "Shaunna's house," which Lawhon struggled to answer. (Id. ("If you can't answer that question [about what your name is], I have to take you to the hospital.").) As Mayes continued his questioning, Lawhon began to yell, which he then explained was a result of his Tourette's syndrome. (Id. ) Mayes next inquired if Lawhon wanted to go to the hospital. (Id. ) Lawhon declined, explaining that he felt "normal right now." (Id. )

Mayes continued to question Lawhon, and eventually told Lawhon that there was nothing he could do for him if he did not want his assistance. (Id. ¶ 24.) Lawhon then again reiterated his demand that the Defendants leave his house. (Id. ) As the EMS personnel prepared to depart, Tunstall exclaimed, "Hell, no. Hell, no. He needs to go out of here right now.... Please." (Id. ) She further advised Defendants that she could not take care of his uncontrollable "mind thing," and that if he ended up dead that night, she would not have done it. (Compl. Ex. C, at 17:27–17:47.) The EMS personnel, however, declined to remove Lawhon from the premises based on his presentation and responses to the questions posed. (Compl. ¶ 24.)

After 20 minutes of attempted counseling and trying to convince Lawhon to voluntarily submit himself to medical evaluation at a hospital, Officer Edwards asked Lawhon to turn around, and repeated his request several times, to which Lawhon adamantly refused. (Compl. Ex. C, at 20:45–21:30.) Officer Edwards then finally consented to Lawhon's repeated requests to have a cigarette, and he told Lawhon they could discuss the situation further after Lawhon smoked it. (Compl. ¶¶ 22, 25.) As Lawhon walked forward, Officer Edwards told Lawhon to "put your hands behind your back." (Id. ¶ 25.) Lawhon refused. (Id. ) At that point, according to the Complaint, Officer Edwards grabbed Lawhon and threw him to the ground, forcing him into the prone position face down into a pillow. (Id. ¶ 26.)

With the assistance of Officer Turner and both EMS personnel, Officer Edwards held Lawhon down. (Id. ) The Complaint alleges that approximately 37 seconds after making physical contact with Lawhon, Officer Edwards had secured Lawhon's hands behind his back with handcuffs. (Id. ¶ 27.) However, the officers and EMS personnel continued to hold Lawhon in the prone position and applied force to his back. (Id. ¶ 28.) Thirty seconds after he was handcuffed, Lawhon allegedly screamed, "I can't breathe." (Id. ¶ 29.)

The Complaint alleges that contrary to training and Richmond City Police Department ("RCPD") General Order 6-10,⁷ the officers and EMS personnel failed to reposition Lawhon to enable him to breathe, and "Mr. Lawhon's face continued to be pressed into the pillow." (Id. ¶¶ 29–31.) Lawhon initially "struggled to relieve the weight Defendants continued to apply to his back," and at some point, he even spit at the Defendants. (Compl. ¶¶ 30, 42.) However, Defendants continued to hold Lawhon down, and at some point, Lawhon failed to respond to Defendants and their use of force, as alleged in the Complaint and evinced in the video evidence. (Id. ¶¶ 32–35.) Officer Edwards then asked Lawhon if he was okay, but Lawhon did not respond. (Id. ¶ 32.)

Five minutes after Lawhon had been secured in handcuffs, EMS Tenley removed the pillow under Lawhon's face. (Id. ¶ 34.) Shortly thereafter, Officer Edwards again asked Lawhon if he was all right, and again, no response was provided. (Id. ¶ 35.) Lawhon was then turned over on his back, nearly six minutes after he had been initially secured in handcuffs, but he remained motionless and unresponsive. (Id. ¶ 36.) EMS Tenley examined Lawhon with his stethoscope, but none of the Defendants rendered any medical aid for an additional 93 seconds. (Id. ¶ 37.)

At that point, the officers and EMS personnel placed Lawhon on a stretcher and transferred him to an ambulance where the EMS personnel undertook resuscitative measures. (Id. ¶¶ 45–46.) Lawhon was then transported to Virginia Commonwealth University ("VCU") Hospital. (Id. ¶ 48.) According to the Complaint, Lawhon's pulse was reestablished, but he had already suffered an irreversible hypoxic brain injury

due to cardiac arrest and/or asphyxia. (Id. ) He was pronounced brain dead two days later on January 18, 2018, and taken off life support on January 20, 2018. (Id. ¶ 49.)

Defendants challenge the viability of Plaintiff's claims on two fronts. Initially, they contend that they are entitled to...