Shannon v. Koehler

• Citation: 673 F.Supp.2d 758
• Decision Date: 04 December 2009
• Docket Number: No. C08-4059-MWB.,C08-4059-MWB.
• Parties: Timothy Clair SHANNON, Plaintiff, v. Officer Michael KOEHLER, in his individual and official capacities, City of Sioux City, and Joseph C. Frisbie, in his individual and official capacities, Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Northern District of Iowa

673 F.Supp.2d 758

Timothy Clair SHANNON, Plaintiff, v. Officer Michael KOEHLER, in his individual and official capacities, City of Sioux City, and Joseph C. Frisbie, in his individual and official capacities, Defendants.

No. C08-4059-MWB.

United States District Court, N.D. Iowa, Western Division.

December 4, 2009.

COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED

Jason B. Gann, Berenstein, Moore, Berenstein, Heffernan & Moeller, LLP, Sioux City, IA, for Plaintiff.

Deena Ann Townley, Jeff W. Wright, Heidman Redmond Fredregill Patterson Plaza Dykstra & Prahl, Sioux City, IA, for Defendants.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

MARK W. BENNETT, District Judge.

                TABLE OF CONTENTS
                I. INTRODUCTION...................................................... 762
                   A. Factual Background............................................ 762
                      1. The events giving rise to this lawsuit..................... 762
                      2. Koehler's training......................................... 764
                      3. The City and Chief Frisbie's involvement................... 765
                   B. Procedural Background......................................... 766
                

                II. LEGAL ANALYSIS ................................................. 767
                    A. Standards for Summary Judgment .............................. 767
                    B. Preliminary Matters ......................................... 769
                       1. Bifurcation of claims .................................... 769
                       2. Navrkal's statements in the record ....................... 770
                          a. Arguments of the parties .............................. 770
                             i. The defendants' initial arguments .................. 770
                            ii. Shannon's arguments in response .................... 771
                           iii. The defendants' reply .............................. 771
                            iv. Oral arguments ..................................... 772
                       3. Analysis ................................................. 772
                    C. Qualified Immunity for Alleged use of Excessive Force ....... 773
                       1. A violation of a constitutional right .................... 773
                          a. Arguments of the parties .............................. 773
                             i. The defendants' initial arguments .................. 773
                            ii. Shannon's arguments in response .................... 774
                           iii. The defendants' reply .............................. 776
                            iv. Oral arguments ..................................... 776
                          b. Analysis .............................................. 777
                             i. Severity of the crime .............................. 778
                            ii. Threat to Koehler or others ........................ 780
                           iii. Resisting arrest ................................... 782
                            iv. Other factors ...................................... 783
                             v. Reasonableness of the force used ................... 783
                       2. Reasonable official standard ............................. 784
                          a. Arguments of the parties .............................. 784
                          b. Analysis .............................................. 785
                    D. Monell Liability ............................................ 786
                      1. Arguments of the parties .................................. 786
                          a. The defendants' initial arguments ..................... 786
                          b. Shannon's arguments in response ....................... 787
                          c. The defendants' reply ................................. 789
                          d. Oral arguments ........................................ 790
                       2. Analysis ................................................. 790
                          a. Pattern of unconstitutional misconduct ................ 790
                          b. Deliberate indifference or tacit authorization ........ 802
                          c. Causation ............................................. 802
                    E. Assault and Battery ......................................... 803
                       1. Arguments of the parties ................................. 803
                          a. The defendants' initial arguments ..................... 803
                          b. Shannon's arguments in response ....................... 803
                          c. The defendants' reply ................................. 804
                          d. Oral arguments ........................................ 804
                       2. Analysis ................................................. 804
                III. CONCLUSION .................................................... 805
                

The following is a brief description of the events involved in this controversy, which includes facts that are both undisputed and disputed: Police officer Michael Koehler, a defendant in this case, responds to a call for a disturbance between two females, at a bar, involving an injured person. Once Koehler arrives on the scene, he is greeted at the front door by a woman, Jill Murad, who allegedly states that one of the females inside had been "touched or grabbed by the male who was in the bar." Koehler and Murad walk to the middle of the establishment. The plaintiff, Timothy Shannon, is behind the bar. Shannon walks out from behind the bar, toward Koehler, and strongly states to Koehler, using profanity, that he owns the bar, does not need Koehler, and orders him to get out of the bar. Shannon eventually comes within arms length of Koehler. Koehler alleges that Shannon pokes him, once, in the chest. Shannon denies this. Koehler uses both his hands to holster his flashlight on a ring in the back of his belt. As he is doing this, Shannon allegedly pokes Koehler a second time, which Shannon denies, and Koehler performs a takedown, which causes Shannon to hit a bar stool and land on the hardwood floor. Once Shannon is on the ground, Koehler places a handcuff on one of Shannon's arms and, after using additional force, secures a second arm in the other handcuff. Koehler claims that the additional force was necessary because Shannon had tucked his arm under his body. Shannon denies being uncooperative and alleges that he was injured during his arrest.

Shannon has filed a lawsuit with this court, as a result of these events. In Count 1 of Shannon's lawsuit, he alleges that Koehler used excessive force in arresting him, in violation of the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution—Shannon brings a cause of action for this alleged violation under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Shannon claims that Defendants City of Sioux City ("City") and Sioux City's Chief of Police at the time, Joseph Frisbie, are liable under § 1983 because they allegedly established, authorized, or tolerated policies and practices that were intended to and did encourage, endorse, and permit their agents and employees to violate Shannon's, and other similarly situated individuals', constitutional rights. In Count 2, Shannon alleges that all defendants, directly or through respondeat superior liability, committed assault and battery. This case is now before the court on the defendants' motion for summary judgment.

I. INTRODUCTION

A. Factual Background

The court will not attempt, here, an exhaustive dissertation on the undisputed and disputed facts in this case. Rather, the court will set forth sufficient facts, both undisputed and disputed, to put the parties' arguments in context concerning the defendants' motion for summary judgment. Unless otherwise indicated, the facts recited here are undisputed, at least for purposes of summary judgment. Additional factual allegations and the extent to which they are or are not disputed or material will be discussed, if necessary, in the court's legal analysis.

1. The events giving rise to this lawsuit

This case arises from an incident that occurred on September 13, 2006, at Tom Foolery's Pub and Grill ("Tom Foolery's") in Sioux City, Iowa. On September 12th, and the early morning of September 13th, Plaintiff Timothy Shannon had had several alcoholic drinks and believed himself to be intoxicated to the point where he could and should not drive a vehicle. At approximately 1:16 a.m., on the morning of September 13th, Christina Navrkal and Jill Murad visited Shannon at Tom Foolery's. Murad had called Navrkal to transport her to Tom Foolery's because Stacy, Murad's sister, had informed Murad that Shannon had had too much to drink and needed help getting home—Murad needed Navrkal to drive her because Murad did not have a license. Navrkal, however, also knew Shannon because she had worked with him at the now defunct Steak Block restaurant in Sergeant Bluff, Iowa. When Murad and Navrkal arrived at Tom Foolery's, they were intoxicated.

The defendants claim that, once Navrkal and Murad arrived at Tom Foolery's, the two women entered into an altercation with Shannon. In fact, the defendants claim that Shannon punched the left side of Navrkal's face with a close fisted right punch. Navrkal grabbed the side of her face with her hand. Murad then shoved Shannon with both hands causing him to fall backward and onto the floor. After Murad shoved Shannon, she turned around, grabbed her beer, and walked to the front of the bar, near the door, with Navrkal. Navrkal continued to hold her face. Shannon remained on the floor, behind the bar, until a male bartender picked up the liquor bottles that Shannon knocked over in his fall and assisted Shannon to his feet. Murad continued yelling at both the male bartender and Shannon while Navrkal continued to walk around with her hand to her face. The male bartender left the bar at approximately 1:30 a.m.

At approximately 1:40 a.m., Murad called 911 because she became concerned for Shannon's well-being based on the head injury he received from the fall. Murad advised the dispatcher that Shannon's head was bleeding. This first 911 call ended, and Murad called 911 a second time and stated there had been an argument and to please send an ambulance.

At approximately 1:46 a.m., Sioux City Police officers were dispatched to Tom Foolery's. Two dispatches went out. The first was for a medical call requesting an ambulance. The second...