Wynne v. Town of E. Hartford

• Docket Number: Civil 3:20-CV-01834 (JCH)
• Decision Date: 07 November 2023
• Parties: WILLIAM WYNNE, ADMINISTRATOR OF THE ESTATE OF ANDREW LENETIS Plaintiff, v. TOWN OF EAST HARTFORD, KEVIN BEEMAN KWANZA CLAYTON Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — District of Connecticut

1

WILLIAM WYNNE, ADMINISTRATOR OF THE ESTATE OF ANDREW LENETIS Plaintiff, v. TOWN OF EAST HARTFORD, KEVIN BEEMAN KWANZA CLAYTON Defendants.

Civil No. 3:20-CV-01834 (JCH)

United States District Court, D. Connecticut

November 7, 2023

RULING ON MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (DOC. NOS 141, 147, 148, 159) AND MOTION TO PRECLUDE PLAINTIFF'S EXPERTS (DOC. NO. 153)

JANET C. HALL UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. INTRODUCTION 3

II. BACKGROUND 4

A. Factual Background 4

1. Mr. Lenetis' Encounter with East Hartford Police 4

2. Mr. Lenetis' Transportation to and Treatment at Saint Francis 9

3. Training Officers Beeman and Clayton Received 12

B. Procedural Background 14

III. LEGAL STANDARD 16

A. Motion for Summary Judgment 16

B. Motion to Preclude 17

1. Qualifications 18 2

. Reliability 18

3. Relevance 20

IV. DISCUSSION 21

A. Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 159) 21

1. Counts One and Two: Title II of the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act 21

2. Count Six: Monell Liability Under Section 1983 31

3. Counts Three, Four, and Seven: Wrongful Death (Negligence) 38

4. Count Five: Connecticut Constitution 43

5. Count Eight: Indemnification 45

6. Conclusion 46

B. Plaintiff and Apportionment Defendants' Motions for Summary Judgment (Doc. Nos. 141, 147, 148) 46

1. Gross or Obvious Negligence 48

2. Expert Testimony 52

C. Motion to Preclude Expert Testimony (Doc. No. 153) 59

1. Testimony of Kathleen Flaherty 59

2. Testimony of Roger Clark 64

V. CONCLUSION 67

I. INTRODUCTION

Plaintiff William Wynne (“Mr. Wynne”), Administrator of the Estate of decedent Andrew Lenetis (“Mr. Lenetis”), brings this action under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (“Rehabilitation Act”), section 1983 of title 42 of the United States Code (“section 1983”), and Connecticut state law against defendants the Town of East Hartford, Officer Kevin Beeman (“Officer Beeman”), and Officer Kwanza Clayton (“Officer Clayton”). In turn, the defendants have filed an Apportionment Complaint (Doc. No. 25) seeking to allocate liability to apportionment defendants emergency medical technician (“EMT”) Philip Zetterstrom (“Mr. Zetterstrom”); EMT Rebecca Vest (“Ms. Vest”); Ambulance Service of Manchester, LLC (“the Ambulance Service”); and Saint Francis Hospital and Medical Center (“Saint Francis”) (collectively, “Apportionment Defendants”).

This case arises out of the death of Mr. Lenetis, which was precipitated by a serious brain injury. The various parties dispute the cause of and entities responsible for Mr. Lenetis' death.

Now before the court are several Motions for Summary Judgment (Docs. No. 141, 147, 148, 159), including a Motion filed by Mr. Wynne (“Wynne's Mot. for Summ. J.”) (Doc. No. 141); one by Saint Francis Hospital (“St. Francis' Mot. for Summ. J.”) (Doc. No. 147); another by the Ambulance Service, Mr. Zetterstrom, and Ms. Vest (“Ambulance Serv.'s Mot. for Summ. J.”) (Doc. No. 148); and a final Motion by East Hartford and Officers Beeman and Clayton (“E. Hartford's Mot. for. Summ. J.”) (Doc. No. 159); as well as a Motion to Preclude Plaintiff's Experts (“E. Hartford's Mot. to Preclude Experts”) (Doc. No. 153). For the reasons set forth below, the Motion for Summary Judgment by the Town of East Hartford and Officers Beeman and Clayton is denied; the Motions for Summary Judgment by Mr. Wynne, the Ambulance Service, Mr. Zetterstrom, Ms. Vest, and Saint Francis are granted; and the Motion to Preclude is granted in part and denied in part.

II. BACKGROUND

A. Factual Background^[1]

1. Mr. Lenetis' Encounter with East Hartford Police At approximately 2:09 p.m. on November 1, 2019, East Hartford Police were dispatched to conduct a welfare check on Andrew Lenetis at the Heritage Garden Apartments. See Plaintiff's Local Rule 56(a)2 Statement of Facts (“Pl.'s 56(a)2 Stmt.”) ¶ 1 (Doc. No. 166-1); Defendants' Local Rule 56(a)1 Statement of Facts (“Defs.' 56(a)1 Stmt.”) ¶ 1 (Doc. No. 159-2); 911 Call Transcript, Defs.' Ex. G, at 1 (Doc. No. 159-10). Heritage Garden Apartments is run by InterCommunity, Inc., which provides behavioral health and addiction recovery services, and the apartment complex houses members of the East Hartford community with mental health disabilities. Pl.'s 56(a)2 Stmt. ¶ 2; Defs.' 56(a)1 Stmt. ¶ 2. Each resident is assigned a case worker, but the apartment complex is not a locked or secure facility. Pl.'s 56(a)2 Stmt. ¶ 3; Defs.' 56(a)1 Stmt. ¶ 3.

The police were summoned to the complex in response to a 911 call by Johnnie Gladstone, an employee of InterCommunity, Inc. and a supervisor of its Community Foundations program. Pl.'s 56(a)2 Stmt. ¶¶ 5-6; Defs.' 56(a)1 Stmt. ¶¶ 5-6. At the time she placed the call to 911, Ms. Gladstone believed that she and the residents of the complex faced an imminent threat of harm. January 27, 2022 Deposition of Johnnie Gladstone (“Defs.' Gladstone Dep. Tr.”), Defs.' Ex. E, at 92:5-92:8 (Doc. No. 159-8); Defs.' 56(a)1 Stmt. ¶ 12.^[2]

According to the 911 call, Mr. Lenetis was “knocking on glass” and had stabbed pumpkins with “two knives.” 911 Call Transcript at 1; Pl.'s 56(a)2 Stmt. ¶ 6; Defs.' 56(a)1 Stmt. ¶ 6; see also January 27, 2022 Deposition of Johnnie Gladstone (“Pl.'s Gladstone Dep. Tr.”), Pl.'s Ex. 3, at 84:2-84:11 (Doc. No. 166-6) (describing the knives Mr. Lenetis was seen with as “pocketknives”). Ms. Gladstone remained on the phone with 911 until police arrived, providing updates on Mr. Lenetis' location as he sat in the community room with a 40-ounce beer, went outside to the front of the building, and then went back inside and began throwing chairs. Pl.'s 56(a)2 Stmt. ¶¶ 8-10; Defs.' 56(a)1 Stmt. ¶¶ 8-10.

Dispatch informed the officers who arrived at the Heritage Garden Apartments that Mr. Lenetis was previously seen outside stabbing pumpkins with knives-and that he still had the knives in his pockets-but that he had since moved inside the building, where he initially threw one or two chairs around the lobby of the complex. Pl.'s 56(a)2 Stmt. ¶¶ 13-14; Defs.' 56(a)1 Stmt. ¶¶ 13-14. Officer Clayton, the first officer to arrive at Heritage Garden, spoke with Ms. Gladstone about what had just transpired. Pl.'s 56(a)2 Stmt. ¶¶ 15, 18; Defs.' Stmt. 56(a)1 ¶¶ 15, 18. When Officer Beeman arrived at the complex, Officer Clayton brought him up to speed. See Officer Kevin Beeman's October 21, 2021 Deposition Transcript (“Defs.' Officer Beeman Dep. Tr.”), Defs.' Ex. D, at 118:6-119:17 (Doc. No. 159-7).

Officer Clayton proceeded to ask Ms. Gladstone where Mr. Lenetis resided and, with the help of Kayla Orozco, a Community Foundations Case Manager, Ms. Gladstone ushered the officers to Mr. Lenetis' room. Pl.'s 56(a)2 Stmt. ¶¶ 20, 22; Defs.' 56(a)1 Stmt. ¶¶ 20, 22. As they walked to the room, Ms. Gladstone believes she informed the officers that Mr. Lenetis was off his medications^[3] and was diagnosed with schizophrenia. Pl.'s 56(a)2 Stmt. ¶ 23; Defs.' 56(a)1 Stmt. ¶ 23; Pl.'s Gladstone Dep. Tr. at 71:13-71:15. While Officer Clayton suggested that he does not recall Ms. Gladstone notifying the officers of this information, he assumed that Mr. Lenetis lived at Heritage Garden as a result of a mental health disability. Officer Kwanza Clayton's November 1, 2021 Deposition Transcript (“Defs.' Officer Clayton Dep. Tr.”), Defs.' Ex. B, at 79:6-79:21 (Doc. No. 159-5). Officer Beeman, however, suggested that no one informed him that Mr. Lenetis had a mental health disability of any kind. See Defs.' Officer Beeman Dep. Tr. at 50:13-51:2.

Upon arrival at Mr. Lenetis' door, the officers asked Ms. Gladstone to leave to ensure she “could be safe.” Pl.'s 56(a)2 Stmt. ¶ 28; Defs.' 56(a)1 Stmt. ¶ 28.^[4] It is disputed whether the officers had time to wait for a Crisis Intervention Team “CIT” officer to show up-CIT Officer Jason Hawley (“Officer Hawley”) arrived on the scene just two minutes after officers Beeman and Clayton. See Officer Kwanza Clayton's November 1, 2021 Deposition Transcript (“Pl.'s Officer Clayton Dep. Tr.”), Pl.'s Ex. 4, at 33:2-33:11 (Doc. No. 166-7); Pl.'s 56(a)2 Stmt. ¶ 31; Defs.' 56(a)1 Stmt. ¶ 31.

Consistent with their training, the officers proceeded to knock on and then step to the sides of Mr. Lenetis' door. Pl.'s 56(a)2 Stmt. ¶ 29; Defs.' 56(a)1 Stmt. ¶ 29. Mr. Lenetis “opened the door pretty quickly”, Defs.' Officer Clayton Dep. Tr. at 89:9, and “walked right out”, id. at 89:22. Before engaging in conversation with Mr. Lenetis, the officers immediately grabbed his arms and attempted to handcuff him. See id. at 91:3-91:23. The officers' stated purpose for doing so was to “make sure [Mr. Lenetis] didn't have anything on him, knives, weapons”, id. at 91:21-91:23, though they saw that he had nothing in his hands, id. at 91:13-91:15.

The parties disagree as to what occurred next.^[5] They dispute whether Mr. Lenetis attempted to walk away or officers quickly shoved him against the hallway wall on their own. Pl.'s 56(a)2 Stmt. ¶ 38; Defs.' 56(a)1 Stmt. ¶ 38. The parties also disagree about whether Mr. Lenetis was intentionally thrown to the ground thereafter. Pl.'s 56(a)2 Stmt. ¶¶ 39-41; Defs.' 56(a)1 Stmt. ¶¶ 39-41. When he was deposed, Officer Clayton said that Mr. Lenetis took a few additional steps before Officer Clayton tripped and fell on top of Mr. Lenetis, bringing both men to the ground. See Defs.'

Officer Clayton Dep. Tr. at 93:17-93:21, 94:23-94:24 96:16-96:20, 97:3-97:4, 98:14-98:16, 102:21-102:24, 162:1-162:3, 170:16-170:20. As the plaintiff points out, however, this testimony conflicts with Officer Clayton's contemporaneous report, wherein he notes that he and Officer Beeman “had to place [Mr. Lenetis] on the ground and try to detain/secure him.” Officer Clayton's...