Tuesday, Oct. 22, 2013 • Federal judge dismissed wrongful death lawsuit

Publisher’s note: This story originally appeared in the Tuesday, Oct. 22, 2013 edition of the Lassen County Times.

A federal judge has dismissed and closed a $15 million wrongful death lawsuit filed by Nancy Schwarz on behalf of her son, Michael Parker, who died at Renown Medical Center in Reno after being incarcerated at the Lassen County Detention Facility in Susanville in 2009.

Defendants in the lawsuit include Lassen County, Undersheriff John Mineau (who serves as the jail commander) and the city of Susanville as well as former Lassen County Sheriff Steven Warren, unnamed correctional officers, Susanville Police Officer Ed Vega and other unnamed police officers.

According to a Sept. 27 ruling by United States District Court Judge Morrison C. England, Jr., the defendant’s motion of summary judgment regarding federal claims was granted and the state claims were dismissed without prejudice due to lack of jurisdiction. England also ordered the clerk to close the case.

The suit’s claims for relief — based on alleged violations of the U.S. Constitution — include cruel and unusual punishment and deliberate indifference to serious medical needs; deprivation of basic necessities of life; deprivation of life without due process; failure to provide medical care for a serious medical condition; failure to summon medical care for an inmate; failure to discharge mandatory duty; reckless or malicious neglect of a dependent adult; deprivation of familial relationships and violation of due process and right of association; and negligent infliction of emotional distress.

Claims against the city
According to the judge’s analysis of the case against the city of Susanville, the plaintiffs argued Vega violated Parker’s constitutional rights because there was no probable cause to take him into custody, Parker should not have been arrested due to his serious medical condition and the alleged practice of raising or setting the bail through ex parte communications with the judge violated Parker’s constitutional rights.

The judge disagreed.

“There is simply no evidence before the court even remotely raising a genuine issue of material fact which would allow a reasonable jury to find officer Vega’s conduct shocks the conscience in arresting Parker.”

According to the judge, the case against the city is based on Monell v. Department of Social Services. The Monell case requires the plaintiff to the city’s actions shocks the conscience.

Likewise, the judge ruled Parker’s incarceration did not shock the conscience.

“There is simply nothing ‘shocking’ about a police officer affecting an arrest when the police officer has probable cause … and the arrestee faces no immediate medical emergency,” Morrison wrote. “This court declines to set a precedent under which simply arresting a person who claims to have a serious medical condition, but is not having a medical emergency is conduct that ‘shocks the conscience.’”

The judge wrote the deposition from former Susanville Police Chief Jeff Atkinson regarding the way bail is sometimes set is not included in the court file, and the plaintiff’s deposition of Vega reveals he had nothing to do with setting the amount of Parker’s bail.

“In sum, the circumstances of Parker’s arrest do not ‘shock the conscience,’” Morrison wrote. “Plaintiff presents not a scintilla of evidence showing that Officer

Vega or any of the other officers or the city of Susanville as an entity had a purpose to cause harm to Parker unrelated to the legitimate object of arrest.”

Morrison also rejected the plaintiff’s claim the city of Susanville violated her First Amendment right to familial association.

“ … Plaintiffs assert several theories as to Susanville’s policies which may give rise to Monell liability,” Morrison wrote. “However, plaintiff points to no policy nor evidence creating a genuine issue of material fact as to where there was a policy which interfered with plaintiff’s First Amendment associational rights … Thus, there is no evidence of a First Amendment violation … ”

Claims against the county
In the part of the case against the county, Morrison questioned parts of the plaintiff’s pleading — for example, a definition of sepsis taken from Wikipedia that “may not be considered as admissible evidence.”

While the plaintiff alleges the Lassen County Adult Detention Facility has a policy of “failing to properly screen individuals for medical issues, their medications and whether the individual is experiencing an emergency medical condition,” the judge wrote, “While there may be a failure to establish a policy to address the immediate medication needs of inmates, there is not a scintilla of evidence causally linking this policy to Parker’s constitutional injury.

The judge also wrote, “Plaintiff has put forward no evidence that the bail amount was inaccurate in Parker’s case.”

In sum … plaintiff has presented no evidence to create a genuine issue of material fact regarding a policy or practice or lack thereof that was the moving force of the alleged constitutional violations.”

Claims against Mineau
According to Morrison’s ruling, the plaintiff “must show that there are genuine issues of material fact as to whether Parker has ‘a serious medical need’ and that Mineau was ‘deliberately indifferent’ to that need … Plaintiff has provided the court with absolutely no evidence creating a genuine issue of material fact as to whether there is ‘culpable action or inaction’ directly attributed to Mineau.”

At the Lassen County Board of Supervisors’ Tuesday, Oct. 8 meeting, Lassen County Counsel Rhetta Vander Ploeg said, “I just want to report that the sheriff’s department did an outstanding job in this case, the hard work, the depositions, the sacrifice to make sure that the case went righteously along the right path. The judge considered all that was presented and realized a motion for summary judgment which basically dismisses the complaint on its merits, was granted.”