Finley v. Huss

102 F.4th 789

Timothy FINLEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Erica HUSS, Deputy Warden, Marquette Branch Prison; Sarah Schroeder,Acting Deputy Warden, Marquette Branch Prison, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 23-1083

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit

Argued: March 20, 2024

Decided and Filed: May 22, 2024

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Michigan at Marquette. No. 2:18-cv-00100—Robert J. Jonker, District Judge.

ARGUED: Christine A. Monta, RODERICK & SOLANGE MACARTHUR JUSTICE CENTER, Washington, D.C., for Appellant. Joshua S. Smith, OFFICE OF THE MICHIGAN ATTORNEY GENERAL, Lansing, Michigan, for Appellees. ON BRIEF: Christine A. Monta, Daniel M. Greenfield, RODERICK & SOLANGE MACARTHUR JUSTICE CENTER, Washington, D.C., Aaron Littman, UCLA SCHOOL OF LAW, Los Angeles, California, for Appellant. Joshua S. Smith, Keith G. Clark, OFFICE OF THE MICHIGAN ATTORNEY GENERAL, Lansing, Michigan, for Appellees.

Before: GILMAN, McKEAGUE, and THAPAR, Circuit Judges.

McKEAGUE, J., delivered the opinion of the court in which GILMAN and THAPAR, JJ., concurred in different parts. GILMAN, J. (pp. 825-28), delivered a separate opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part. THAPAR, J. (pp. 828-32) also delivered a separate opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part.

OPINION

McKEAGUE, Circuit Judge.

Timothy Finley is serving a Michigan prison sentence while suffering from severe psychiatric disorders. Over several weeks in 2016, Finley's mental health hit a breaking point: he repeatedly cut himself with—and swallowed—multiple razorblades. At the same time, his persistent misconduct made him difficult to manage. Eventually, prison officials placed Finley in a heavily restrictive cell in administrative segregation and kept him there for approximately three months. Finley now challenges that decision. He brought this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging violations of the Eighth Amendment and his right to procedural due process. He also included disability-discrimination claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Rehabilitation Act.

Finley targets two prison decisionmakers. Erica Huss, the deputy warden, assigned Finley to administrative segregation. Then Sarah Schroeder, who temporarily served as deputy warden during Huss's leave of absence, kept Finley in administrative segregation for months. Both officials knew about Finley's serious mental-health problems and repeated instances of self-harm. In addition, Huss made her decision despite a warning from Finley's mental-healthcare provider that solitary confinement was likely to worsen his mental health. And Schroeder failed to carry out the mental-healthcare provider's request that Finley be promptly transferred to a treatment program. In the process, both deputy wardens likely violated Michigan's correctional policies about mentally ill inmates in solitary confinement.

The district court granted summary judgment to Huss and Schroeder on all claims. We agree that summary judgment was warranted for Finley's procedural due process and statutory discrimination claims. But summary judgment was improper for Finley's Eighth Amendment claim because he presented evidence sufficient to find that the deputy wardens violated his clearly established rights. We thus AFFIRM in part, REVERSE in part, and REMAND for further proceedings.

I. BACKGROUND

Timothy Finley's appeal revolves around events that took place between August 2016 and January 2017 during his incarceration at a Michigan Department of Corrections (MDOC) facility. Finley's claims hinge on two key decisions made by a pair of prison officials: Erica Huss's decision to place him in administrative segregation, and Sarah Schroeder's decision to keep him there for months.

A. Prison Policies on Segregation and Mental Health

Before delving into the specifics of Finley's case, we briefly overview MDOC's policies and programs on segregated housing and mentally ill inmates. Key here, segregation is a form of solitary confinement used to physically separate inmates with special management needs from the general population. It can be either administrative or punitive. Although "administrative segregation" isn't technically a form of punishment, it is often triggered by instances of serious misconduct.

MDOC has specific rules designed to keep mentally ill inmates out of administrative segregation. That aligns with the overwhelming medical consensus that solitary confinement, though harmful to even mentally stable inmates, is particularly devastating for those with severe psychiatric disorders. Accordingly, MDOC staffs its prisons with mental-health professionals who monitor and treat inmates with mental illnesses. By rule, prison officials cannot place a mentally ill inmate into administrative segregation without first consulting a mental-health professional about whether that inmate's mental-health needs can be met in segregation. See Mich. Dep't of Corr., Policy Directive 04.05.120 ¶ N. The rules also stress that mentally ill inmates should not ordinarily be housed in segregation if their illnesses might prevent proper adjustment to solitary confinement. See Mich. Dep't of Corr., Policy Directive 04.06.182 ¶ D.

MDOC recognizes that some mentally ill inmates might be impossible to manage outside of a segregation unit. In such cases, mental-health professionals must closely monitor the inmate to ensure that his or her needs are met in segregation. See id. If a mental-health professional decides that an inmate needs medical care instead of segregation, the rules prescribe various steps depending on the specific medical recommendation. Id. ¶¶ H-L. When an inmate requires intensive inpatient mental health services, he or she must be released from segregation as soon as possible. For other recommended treatment settings, prison officials get more flexibility—but if they agree with the recommendation, they must release the inmate from segregation within three business days. Id.

MDOC operates several treatment-oriented programs that it deems more appropriate than segregation for those with serious mental illnesses. For severe cases, inpatient psychiatric services and the Residential Treatment Program are available. Outpatient programs also exist. Some, like the Secure Status Outpatient Treatment Program, are designed specifically for inmates who cannot be safely integrated with others. And most relevant to Finley, the Interim Care Program is an outpatient program created to remove mentally ill inmates from administrative segregation and instead place them—for their own wellbeing—into general population settings. Inmates participating in the Interim Care Program enjoy fewer restrictions than their counterparts in administrative segregation. However, the record is unclear about the specific differences.

B. Finley's Mental Illness and Misconduct

Finley has a long history of mental illness. Among other things, doctors have diagnosed him with bipolar and major depressive disorders. Finley's MDOC medical records are replete with various diagnoses, medical reports, and suicide-risk evaluations. He has attempted suicide multiple times—twice while incarcerated. At the same time, Finley also has a long history of misconduct in prison. Over the course of about twenty years in various MDOC facilities, he accumulated a lengthy rap sheet of serious rule violations. That misbehavior, combined with his serious mental illnesses, sometimes led prison officials to face difficult situations.

In May 2016, MDOC officials transferred Finley to Marquette Branch Prison—a high-security facility in northern Michigan capable of confining particularly challenging inmates. Mandi Salmi, a registered nurse, became Finley's assigned mental-health professional. Finley was initially placed in the Secure Status Outpatient Treatment Program, where he received mental-health treatment. He left the program in June and joined the general population.

Finley's mental health reached a breaking point in late August 2016. He told prison staff that he was experiencing thoughts of self-harm, and officials promptly placed him in a suicide-observation cell. Finley somehow managed to sneak a razorblade into the cell. Despite his near-constant supervision, Finley repeatedly used the razor to cut himself for two straight days. He wrote on the cell's walls with his own blood. Finley then swallowed the razor, and it became lodged in his throat. Prison officials kept Finley in suicide observation for the next week, interrupted by two separate hospital trips where doctors tried—but ultimately failed—to surgically extract the razor. During this time and in the following weeks, Finley refused to take some of his prescribed medications as directed.

On September 6, Finley (still in suicide observation) discussed mental-health treatment options with a prison psychiatrist and the resident unit manager. Both officials recommended the Residential Treatment Program, an intensive treatment setting. Finley then asked Salmi to refer him to that program. When she refused, he asked her to refer him to the Interim Care Program instead. He was not referred to either program. Salmi reasoned that the Residential Treatment Program wasn't yet clinically warranted, and that the Interim Care Program was unavailable to inmates outside of administrative segregation.

Finley returned to the general population the next day. Then, on September 8, a correctional officer found makeshift metal tools (used for television repair) in Finley's cell. Prison officials charged Finley with possessing a weapon and placed him in temporary administrative segregation pending the outcome of a misconduct hearing. Segregation triggered immediate self-harm. Within an hour or two, Finley started cutting himself with another razorblade and wrote "death" on the wall with his blood. He told Salmi that he was considering hanging himself. Salmi decided that Finley was at a moderate risk of suicide,...