LeMoon v. California Forensic Medical Group, Inc.

Background

This supplemental order addressed the parties’ briefing on defendants’ motions for summary judgment. The case concerns Jeremey Conaway’s detention and incarceration at the Solano County Justice Center Detention Facility, where he died by suicide in his cell.

In an earlier summary-judgment order, the court denied the CFMG defendants’ motion in its entirety and granted the County of Solano and Sheriff Ferrara partial summary judgment. The court granted Sheriff Ferrara summary judgment in his individual capacity on the claims for cruel and unusual punishment and deliberate indifference, and on the claim for deprivation of substantive due process. The court also granted him qualified immunity on those claims. As to the third cause of action, the court ruled that six of eight alleged unconstitutional policies or practices could not survive summary judgment.

The court then requested supplemental briefing on three issues: whether Sheriff Ferrara could still be liable in a supervisory or official capacity for constitutional violations allegedly committed by the CFMG defendants; whether the court’s findings about the eight policies and practices should also apply to the CFMG defendants; and whether the County remained a defendant on claims involving the CFMG defendants.

Rulings

The court ruled that LeMoon had not shown that Sheriff Ferrara was liable in his supervisory capacity. Under the governing standard, a supervisor may be liable if personally involved in a constitutional deprivation or if a sufficient causal connection exists between the supervisor’s wrongful conduct and the violation. The court found no evidence that Sheriff Ferrara supervised the CFMG defendants or knew about their alleged constitutional violations. It therefore concluded that no reasonable juror could find him liable in that capacity.

The court also ruled that Sheriff Ferrara was not liable in his official capacity. Because an official-capacity suit ultimately seeks to hold the governmental entity liable, and the County was already named as a defendant, the court determined that Sheriff Ferrara was a redundant defendant. It dismissed him as an official-capacity defendant and granted summary judgment in his favor on all causes of action.

The court next applied its prior findings concerning six alleged policies, practices, or omissions to the CFMG defendants. Those allegations included matters involving mental-health observation, housing suicidal inmates in cells with suicide hazards, training, psychological consultations, and housing conditions. The court concluded that these six policies or practices either were not viable against CFMG or were not the moving force behind a constitutional violation by the CFMG defendants. Although the court had previously denied CFMG’s motion for summary judgment, it explained that the earlier ruling was largely based on how the motion had been presented. After reviewing the briefing and evidentiary record, the court granted summary judgment in favor of the CFMG defendants on the six policies, practices, or omissions.

The parties agreed that the County would be liable for the CFMG defendants’ actions regarding the two remaining practices or omissions if those actions were found to violate the Constitution. Those two matters were CFMG’s alleged custom of treating “priority 1” tasks as routine and its alleged failure to require employees to review an inmate’s prior medical records when providing treatment. The County therefore remains a defendant, along with the CFMG defendants, as to those two practices only. The court stated that no other policies, practices, or omissions would be tried.

Next steps

The court vacated the May 19, 2022 case-management conference and re-referred the matter to Magistrate Judge Beeler for another settlement conference. If the case does not settle, the parties must submit a proposed trial date, after which the court will either enter a revised pretrial order with pretrial instructions or schedule a trial-setting conference.