Nelson v. Lott
Decision Date | 24 July 2018 |
Docket Number | Civil Action No. 5:18-CV-0059-CLS |
Citation | 330 F.Supp.3d 1314 |
Parties | Dorothy NELSON, who sues individually, and, as Administrator Ad Litem of the Estate of Randy Nelson, deceased, Plaintiff, v. Gregg LOTT, et al., Defendants. |
Court | U.S. District Court — Northern District of Alabama |
Devon M. Jacob, Jacob Litigation, Mechanicsburg, PA, Martin E. Weinberg, Martin Weinberg, PC, Shannon, AL, for Plaintiff.
David J. Canupp, Lauren A. Smith, Lanier Ford Shaver & Payne P.C., Huntsville, AL, for Defendants.
Randy Nelson died as a result of his encounter with two Athens, Alabama police officers in the Emergency Room of the Athens-Limestone County Hospital on February 3, 2016. The Second Amended Complaint filed by Dorothy Nelson, the mother and Administrator Ad Litem of Randy Nelson's estate, alleged eight claims against four defendants: i.e. , (1) a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Athens Police Officers Gregg Lott and Dusty Meadows for the use of excessive force in violation of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution (Count I); (2) a separate § 1983 claim against Officer Dusty Meadows for failing to intervene when Officer Gregg Lott used his Taser to subdue Randy Nelson (Count II); (3) a municipal liability claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the City of Athens, Alabama ("the City"), for failing to properly train Officers Lott and Meadows (Count III); (4) a claim against the City for violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA"), 42 U.S.C. § 12131 et seq. (Count IV); (5) a claim against the City for violation of the Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. § 794 (Count V); (6) a claim against the Huntsville Hospital Health System, doing business as the Athens-Limestone County Hospital ("the hospital"), for violation of the ADA (Count VI); (7) a claim against the hospital for violation of the Rehabilitation Act (Count VII); and (8) a claim against all defendants under Alabama Code § 6-5-410 (1975) for the wrongful death of Randy Nelson (Count VIII).1 All claims against the City and hospital in Counts III through VIII were dismissed with prejudice on June 4, 2018, in accordance with the parties' stipulation.2 Thus, the only claims that remain pending are those against Officers Gregg Lott and Dusty Meadows in Counts I, II, and VIII.
The case currently is before the court on the motion of defendants Lott and Meadows to dismiss all remaining claims for failure to state claims upon which relief can be granted.3 Following consideration of the pleadings, briefs of counsel,4 evidentiary materials referenced in the complaint,5 and a transcript of the audio portions of the video recording produced by the body camera attached to the uniform of Officer Dusty Meadows,6 this court concludes that the motion should be granted.
Iqbal , 556 U.S. at 678-79, 129 S.Ct. 1937 ( ). In addition, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(d) states that:
If, on a motion under Rule 12(b)(6) or 12(c), matters outside the pleadings are presented to and not excluded by the court, the motion must be treated as one for summary judgment under Rule 56. All parties must be given a reasonable opportunity to present all the material that is pertinent to the motion.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(d). Thus, courts normally "do not consider anything beyond the face of the complaint and documents attached thereto when analyzing a motion to dismiss." Financial Security Assurance, Inc. v. Stephens, Inc. , 500 F.3d 1276, 1284 (11th Cir. 2007) (emphasis supplied) (citing Brooks v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Florida, Inc. , 116 F.3d 1364, 1368 (11th Cir. 1997) ).
Here, however, the parties' briefs reference two evidentiary items that are not attached to the complaint: i.e. , doc. no. 25 ( ); and, doc. no. 50 (the February 9, 2016 Alabama Department of Forensic Sciences Report of Autopsy (hereafter, "Medical Examiner's Report ") ). Even though neither of those evidentiary items are attached to plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, both are clearly referred to therein.7 And, at least with regard to the bodycam video, the failure to actually attach a copy to the complaint appears to have been merely a clerical omission. Accordingly, the court will rely upon both the bodycam video and the autopsy report, in addition to the allegations of plaintiffs Second Amended Complaint, when determining the relevant facts.
Dorothy Nelson ("plaintiff") is the mother of Randy Nelson ("Nelson") and Administrator Ad Litem of his estate.8 On the date of the events leading to this action, Nelson was a large,9 forty-nine-year-old man who "was known to suffer from chronic mental illness, having been previously diagnosed with schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, and having been approved to receive social security disability [benefits as a result of his mental conditions]."10
The Second Amended Complaint alleges that plaintiff drove her son to the Athens-Limestone Hospital ("hospital") on February 3, 2016, for the purpose of receiving treatment for "anorexic with extremely poor oral intake."11 The Medical Examiner recorded that Nelson's "behavioral problems" had begun four days earlier.12
This 49-year-old male was taken to the Athens-Limestone Emergency Department (ED) on February 3, 2016, at 0850 hours with behavioral problems. His mother denied the presence of a fever, cough, or other complaint. The onset of his behavioral problems was 4 days prior to his presentation at the ED. According to medical records, the patient was unable to care for himself, control himself, and had unclear thinking with associated agitation. The decedent had been...
To continue reading
Request your trial- Patterson v. Nine Energy Serv., LLC
-
W.Va. State Police v. J.H.
...similar issues regarding when it was appropriate to include a video recording in considering a motion to dismiss. In Nelson v. Lott, 330 F. Supp. 3d 1314 (N.D. Ala. 2018), the court found that it was appropriate to consider two items, a video recording of the incident and an autopsy report,......
-
W. Va. State Police v. J.H.
...similar issues regarding when it was appropriate to include a video recording in considering a motion to dismiss. In Nelson v. Lott , 330 F. Supp. 3d 1314 (N.D. Ala. 2018), the court found that it was appropriate to consider two items, a video recording of the incident and an autopsy report......
-
Edwards v. Mashego
...Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 231 (2009) (quoting Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818 (1982)); see Nelson v. Lott, 330 F. Supp. 3d 1314, 1327 (N.D. Ala.2018). "The protection of qualified immunity applies regardless of whether the government official's error is 'a mistake of law, a......