Patino v. County Of Monterey

Background

Ana Regalado Patino sued individually and as successor in interest to the estate of her son, Carlos Patino Regalado. The opinion states that Regalado died after hanging himself while in custody at the Monterey County Jail in March 2021. The County operated the jail, and the County contracted with Wellpath, LLC to provide medical, mental-health, and dental services to inmates. Kip Hallman was Wellpath’s president, Jorge Dominicis was its chief executive officer, and Thomas Pangburn, M.D., was its chief clinical officer.

Patino’s first amended complaint asserted eight claims against various defendants. The claims included constitutional claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, California medical-malpractice and negligence claims, a claim under California Government Code § 815.2, and a wrongful-death claim. Hallman, Dominicis, and Pangburn moved under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), which allows dismissal for failure to state a legally sufficient claim. Their motion challenged Claims 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, and 8 as asserted against them.

Court’s analysis

Survival-action requirements—Claims 1, 2, and 8. Patino asserted some claims as survival actions for injuries Regalado suffered before his death. California law requires specified information in an affidavit or declaration for a successor-in-interest to bring a survival action. Although Patino said she had filed a declaration, the court could not locate it on the docket. The court therefore granted the motion to dismiss Claims 1, 2, and 8 with leave to amend. Patino could address the defect by filing the required declaration or affidavit before filing an amended pleading.

Constitutional claims—Claims 1 and 2. Claim 1 alleged deliberate indifference to serious medical and mental-health needs, and Claim 2 alleged failure to protect from harm, both under the Fourteenth Amendment and § 1983. The court found that the complaint grouped the defendants together and did not identify what Hallman, Dominicis, or Pangburn personally did or failed to do. It did not allege facts showing that these senior Wellpath executives knew of Regalado’s existence or suicidal ideation, performed safety checks, or controlled his housing placement.

The court also rejected the claims insofar as they relied on Monell liability. Monell liability is a theory under which a public entity may be liable for a policy or practice that causes a constitutional violation. The court stated that Monell claims cannot be asserted against the moving defendants in their individual capacities, and that official-capacity Monell claims against them would duplicate Patino’s Monell claims against Wellpath. The court granted dismissal of Claims 1 and 2 with leave to amend as to alleged personal involvement or supervisory liability, but without leave to amend as to Monell claims.

Loss of the parent-child relationship—Claim 3. Claim 3 alleged that the defendants’ deliberate indifference violated Patino’s Fourteenth Amendment liberty interest in her relationship with her son. Because the court found that Patino had not adequately alleged deliberate indifference by the moving defendants, it granted dismissal of Claim 3 with leave to amend.

Negligent supervision, training, hiring, and retention—Claim 6. The court found that Claim 6 used group allegations that did not distinguish among the defendants’ conduct and appeared to rely on California Government Code § 815.2, a provision the moving defendants argued applies to public entities rather than individuals. The court granted dismissal of Claim 6 with leave to amend so Patino could identify each defendant’s conduct and specify the legal basis for the claim.

Wrongful death and negligence—Claims 7 and 8. The court found that the complaint did not connect any specific wrongful or negligent act by Hallman, Dominicis, or Pangburn to Regalado’s death. The allegations stated what “Defendants” collectively did or failed to do but did not identify conduct attributable to each moving defendant. The court granted dismissal of Claims 7 and 8 with leave to amend.

Disposition

The court granted the motion to dismiss filed by Hallman, Dominicis, and Pangburn, with leave to amend in part and without leave to amend in part. Leave to amend applied to all claims at issue except Monell claims against those defendants, which were dismissed without leave to amend. Patino was ordered to file any amended pleading by February 23, 2023. The order terminated docket entry 61.