Zinter v. Salvaggio
| Decision Date | 07 July 2022 |
| Docket Number | Case No. 5:18-cv-680-RCL |
| Parties | Russell ZINTER, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Joseph SALVAGGIO, et al., Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Western District of Texas |
Austin M. Reyna, Fourth Court of Appeals, San Antonio, TX, Brandon J. Grable, Grable Grimshaw PLLC, San Antonio, TX, for Plaintiffs Russell Zinter, Jack Miller, Brian Howd, James A. Mead, Mark Brown, David Bailey, Juan Gonzales, Jr., Kevin Egan, Jonathon Green, James Springer, Theresa C. Richard, Jason Green, Greg Gardiner.
Brandon J. Grable, Grable Grimshaw PLLC, San Antonio, TX, for Plaintiff Joseph Brandon Pierce.
Selena Herrara, Buffalo, OK, Pro Se.
Adolfo Ruiz, Denton Navarro Rocha Bernal & Zech, San Antonio, TX, Hector Xavier Saenz, Law Offices of Charles S. Frigerio, San Antonio, TX, Charles Straith Frigerio, Attorney at Law, San Antonio, TX, for Defendants Chief Joseph Salvaggio, Officer John Doe Vasquez, Detective Jim Wells.
Hector Xavier Saenz, Law Offices of Charles S. Frigerio, San Antonio, TX, Charles Straith Frigerio, Attorney at Law, San Antonio, TX, for Defendants Lieutenant John Doe Anderson, Corporal C. Mandry, Officer L. Farias, Officer John Doe Evans, Officer John Doe Hernandez.
Adolfo Ruiz, Denton Navarro Rocha Bernal & Zech, San Antonio, TX, for Defendants John Doe Tazer 1, John Doe Tazer 2.
Adolfo Ruiz, Patrick Charles Bernal, Denton Navarro Rocha Bernal & Zech, San Antonio, TX, for Defendant The City of Leon Valley, Texas.
Charles Straith Frigerio, Attorney at Law, San Antonio, TX, for Defendants Lieutenant David Anderson, Officer Johnny Vasquez, Cpl. Chad Mandry, Officer Brandon Evans, Officer Uziel Hernandez, Officer Yarbrough, Officer Azar, Officer Urdiales, Officer Castro, Officer Tacquard.
Royce C. Lamberth, United States District Judge On several sunny days in June 2018 in Leon Valley, Texas, a group of protestors clashed with the local police department. These protestors took the phrase "government oversight" literally—videotaping and livestreaming Leon Valley Police Department ("LVPD") officers in person. When the dust settled, the LVPD had taken several protestors into custody (tasing one in the process) and confiscated a small film studio's worth of cell phones and video equipment. The protestors sued the officers and the City of Leon Valley (the "City" or "Leon Valley") for violating their First and Fourth Amendment rights. This is that lawsuit.
All three parties have moved for summary judgment. The LVPD officers argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity for their actions. The City contends that the officers’ actions do not reflect a final policymaker's decision or a widespread custom of the LVPD. And the protestors assert that the officers’ constitutional violations entitle them to judgment without a trial. In the Court's view, these arguments are a mixed bag. Some claims against the officers must proceed to trial. But the Court will dismiss other claims against the officers and the claims against the City. Based on the parties’ motions, the record as a whole, certain publicly available videos, and applicable law, the Court will GRANT IN PART and DENY IN PART the defendant officers’ motion for summary judgment; will GRANT the City of Leon Valley's motion for summary judgment as to municipal liability; and will DENY plaintiffs’ cross-motion for partial summary judgment. See Defs.’ Mot. for Summ. J. ("LVPD Mot."), ECF No. 149; Defendant City Mot. for Summ. J. ("City Mot."), ECF No. 152; Pls.’ Partial Mot. for Summ. J. ( ), ECF No. 153-1. The Court will also ORDER the defendant officers to show cause as to why the Court should not grant summary judgment in plaintiffs’ favor on several claims.
On three separate days in June 2018, a group of protestors brushed up against the Leon Valley Police Department. The plaintiffs say that they were "detained, arrested, criminally charged," and had their property seized "without any lawful basis" by the LVPD. Second Am. Compl. ¶ 1, ECF No. 87. The defendants are then-LVPD Chief Joseph Salvaggio ("Chief Salvaggio"), various LVPD officers, and the City of Leon Valley. Id. ¶¶ 37–55. The parties dispute almost every detail about what occurred. "Undisputed" statements of facts are peppered with conclusory allegations and emotionally-charged language. See, e.g. , LVPD Mot. 6 (); LVPD Mot. 12 (); Pls.’ Mot. 4 ().
To distill a signal from this noise, the Court will take a few steps. Almost every event in this case has been documented through video footage—either through the LVPD officers’ bodycams or the protestors’ own devices. A court should "assign greater weight ... to the facts evident from video recordings taken at the scene" of a dispute. Buehler v. Dear , 27 F.4th 969, 979 (5th Cir. 2022) (quoting Carnaby v. City of Houston , 636 F.3d 183, 187 (5th Cir. 2011) ). The Court will do so here. Plaintiffs have also posted some videos of these encounters on YouTube instead of submitting them as exhibits. Because these videos reproduce events captured by the officers’ body cams, the Court takes judicial notice of their contents and considers them among the evidence submitted. See Fed. R. Evid. 201(b). And, finally, because so many facts are disputed, the Court will highlight areas with material disputes rather than list out each side's version of the story.
This saga begins with two protestors—nonparty Jesus Padilla and plaintiff Mark Brown. On June 14, 2018, Padilla and Brown tried to enter Leon Valley City Hall carrying video cameras. Brown Dep. 65:7–13, ECF No. 154-6. Leon Valley City Hall, like many municipal buildings, contains several government offices: relevant here, the police department and the municipal court. See ECF No. 151-1 at 64. That day, a Leon Valley municipal judge had entered an order prohibiting video recording in "the courtroom and court business areas." ECF No. 154-15 at 2.1 Before Padilla and Brown entered the building, officers identified them and told them to "get off the front" of City Hall. Brown Dep. 66:1-5, 12-13.
The parties dispute what happened next, but it ended with both Padilla and Brown in handcuffs. As visible on video footage, officers walked over to Padilla and placed him in custody. PX-13 at 13:52:50–:53.2 Another officer approached Brown and gestured for him to back away from Padilla. Id. at 13:52:53. As Brown stood in the street—all while holding his recording devices—officers grabbed his arms and began struggling with him. Id. at 13:52:58–:53:00. Other officers soon rushed in. Id. Brown fell to the sidewalk (according to the officers, while resisting). See PX-11 at 13:56:30–:40; ECF No. 151-1 at 21. An officer used his taser on Brown (according to Brown, "two or three times") while he was on the ground. PX-11 at 13:56:45–:48; Brown Dep. 69:15–20. The officers say that Brown resisted. See, e.g. , ECF No. 151-1 at 21 (). Brown says that he never resisted. Brown Dep. 76:5-7, 77:5-9 ( ). Once officers handcuffed Brown, they requested emergency medical services and escorted him to a local hospital. See ECF No. 151-1 at 23; Brown Dep. 78:9–79:2.
Four days later, another group of protestors arrived at Leon Valley City Hall. These protestors included plaintiffs David Bailey, James Springer, Juan Gonzales, James Mead, and Russell Zinter. Leon Valley City Hall's front entrance has two sets of glass double doors with a small foyer between them. See PX-18 at 13:41:12. Some plaintiffs stood in this foyer while protesting and recording City officials. Id. Plaintiff Bailey carried a "thin blue line" version of the American flag with him. See id. at 13:46:17. To protest the LVPD, Bailey held the flag up to the glass door and "dirtied [his] shoes" by stepping on the flag. See id. ; Bailey Dep. 34:21–22, ECF No. 151-1 at 54. Officers watched this scene unfold. See generally PX-18.
At one point, Bailey stood in front of the internal glass doors holding his flag. Id. at 13:46:30. A bystander opened the external set of doors to enter City Hall. Id. at 13:46:30–:32. As she did so, Bailey stepped back from the internal set of doors. Id. On video, an officer can be heard saying: Id. at 13:46:32–:34. Officers entered the foyer and placed Bailey under arrest for obstructing a passageway. Id. at 13:46:34–:39. They then turned to the other plaintiffs in the foyer, demanded their recording devices, and placed them in handcuffs. Id. at 13:46:45–:47:00; Springer Aff. ¶ 4, ECF No. 153-3 at 82–83; Gonzales Aff. ¶ 4, ECF No. 153-3 at 96. Gonzales remained handcuffed in police custody for "about an hour." Gonzales Aff. ¶ 6. Officers held Bailey and Springer in custody overnight and transported them to the Bexar County jail. Bailey Dep. 50:12–51:19; Springer Aff. ¶¶ 9, 11.
While officers handcuffed those plaintiffs, one officer pointed to protestors on the public sidewalk in front of City Hall and stated: "We're gonna need those cameras." PX-86 at 13:47:44–:46. An officer ordered plaintiff James Mead to identify himself as a witness to a crime. Id. at 13:47:50–:54. Mead responded that he did not have his driver's license with him. Id. at 13:48:05–:10. The officer then accused Mead of refusing to identify and placed him in handcuffs. Id. at 13:48:10–:30. Mead estimated that the officers held him in custody for 30 minutes to one hour. See Mead Dep. 47:7–19, ECF No. 154-3 (). At the same time, officers approached plaintiff Russell Zinter on the sidewalk in front of City Hall....
To continue reading
Request your trial