Schmidt v. Cnty. of San Diego

1

JENNIFER SCHMIDT, et al., Plaintiffs, v. COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, et al., Defendants.

No. 23-cv-0899-W-DDL

United States District Court, S.D. California

September 26, 2024

ORDER DENYING IN PART AND GRANTING IN PART WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS THE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT [DOC. 18]

HON THOMAS J. WHELAN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.

Pending before the Court is Defendant County of San Diego and Silva Suaking's motion to dismiss the Second Amended Complaint (“SAC” [Doc. 16]) under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Plaintiffs Jennifer Schmidt and Lyndzy Biondo oppose.

The Court decides the matter on the papers submitted and without oral argument. See Civ.L.R. 7.1(d)(1). For the following reasons, the Court DENIES IN PART and GRANTS IN PART without leave to amend the motion to dismiss [Doc. 18].

I. Factual Background

Most of the following factual allegations are taken verbatim from the SAC.

On February 12, 2022, Gilbert Gonzalo Gil, crashed his truck in a ditch in Escondido, California. (SAC ¶ 37.) Mr. Gil was 67 and suffering from confusion associated with early on-set dementia. (Id.) The California Highway Patrol (“CHP”) found Mr. Gil inside the truck. (Id. ¶ 38.) The SAC alleges that it is unknown at this time if Mr. Gil was under the influence based on alleged statements he made; however, CHP arrested him for being under the influence. (Id.)

At approximately the same time, Mr. Gil's daughter Plaintiff Jennifer Schmidt, noticed that her father had not come over as he did every night. (SAC ¶ 39.) Jennifer checked an app on her phone and discovered that her father had been in a car accident. (Id.) Jennifer got in her car and drove to the scene and when she arrived, Mr. Gil was being placed in the back of a patrol car. (Id.) Jennifer asked officers what was happening and she was told that Mr. Gil was being arrested for being under the influence. (Id.)

Jennifer noticed that her father was showing signs of thought disorganization, nonsensical communication, altered mental status, and confusion and she informed the CHP officers that these symptoms were associated with early on-set dementia and uncontrolled diabetes. (SAC ¶ 40.) The officers arrested Mr. Gil and transported him to the Vista Detention Facility (“VDF”). (Id. ¶ 41.) It is unknown whether the officers informed VDF intake staff that Mr. Gil was suffering from early on-set dementia and diabetes. (Id.) Mr. Gil was placed in a holding cell that night. (Id.)

Early the next morning, Jennifer contacted the CHP to determine Mr. Gil's whereabouts. (SAC ¶ 42.) Jennifer was informed that he had been booked into VDF as a book and release. (Id.) Jennifer checked the Sheriff's website and noticed that Mr. Gil was on the release cue. (Id.) Inmates on the release que are usually released between 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. (Id.) Because Mr. Gil had not been released by 9:00 a.m., Jennifer called the jail to inquire about her father and was told by a jail employee that Mr. Gil was supposed to be released. (Id.) The employee then placed Jennifer on hold and transferred her to the medical services division. (Id.)

An unknown medical nurse told Jennifer that Mr. Gil was in a book and release cell but was not “sobering up” so she was not sure when he would be released. (SAC ¶ 43.) In response, Jennifer said that Mr. Gil was suffering from symptoms of early on-set dementia and uncontrolled diabetes and, therefore, “He's not going to sober up, he's sick. This is not a drug issue.” (Id.) The medical employee told Jennifer she would call her back after speaking to her supervisor. (Id.) A minute later, the employee called Jennifer and told her to meet in the lobby and they would release Mr. Gil into her custody. (Id.)

Jennifer immediately picked up Mr. Gil and signed for his property paperwork because he was physically incapable. (SAC ¶ 44.) Jennifer then took Mr. Gil to his home to eat and sleep, hoping that would help calm him. (Id.) However, later that night, Mr. Gil again exhibited bizarre behavior indicating severe confusion and distress. (Id.) A family member called 911 and Escondido Police were dispatched to the home. (Id.) The police were led to Mr. Gil's bedroom and arrested him for being under the influence. (Id.)

Before transporting Mr. Gil to VDF, at 11:30 p.m., Mr. Gil was taken to Palomar Medical Center Emergency Department (“PMCED”) to determine if he was medically cleared to be detained. (SAC ¶ 45.) Due to Mr. Gil's severe medical distress, he was not capable of consenting to medical treatment. (Id.) The PMCED doctor informed Escondido Officer Donaghy that “based on a visual examination, Mr. Gil appears medically safe to detain ... however, additional tests should be performed.” (Id.) The doctor also stated Mr. Gil needed to be brought back to PMCED if he started experiencing “chest pain or palpitations.” (Id.) The doctor filled out a discharge form to that effect, which Officer Donaghy provided to Defendant Silva Suaking, the medical intake nurse at VDF. (Id.)

During the intake process, Mr. Gil continued to display thought disorganization, nonsensical communication, altered mental status, and confusion, which the SAC alleges are signs and symptoms associated with early on-set dementia and uncontrolled diabetes. (SAC ¶ 47.) The intake paperwork also indicates that Defendant Nurse Suaking knew Mr. Gil suffered from hypertension and diabetes mellitus, yet Nurse Suaking failed to implement a medical treatment plan or follow-up plan relating to Mr. Gil's hypertension. (Id. ¶¶ 47, 48.) Instead, Nurse Suaking simply performed a glucose test, which came back elevated at 253, and then administered 5 units of insulin to Mr. Gil, per the operative Standard Nursing Procedure (“SNP”). (Id. ¶ 48.) The SAC alleges that according to San Diego County's diabetes SNP, Mr. Gil was to have his glucose levels checked at least three times a day, but the limited medical records indicate that Nurse Suaking did not order follow-up glucose testing. (Id.) Nurse Suaking's medical entry also indicates she did not communicate or educate Mr. Gil on his glucose levels because Mr. Gil was too unstable at the time. (Id.) Nurse Suaking also failed to input the medical flags into Mr. Gil's Electronic Medical Record and did not order a nursing follow-up as mandated by county policy. (Id.)

During the intake evaluation, Nurse Suaking read the discharge instructions from PMCED and was put on notice that Mr. Gil did not undergo a medical clearance at PMCED because he could not consent to medical treatment due to the level of his medical distress. (SAC ¶ 49.) Nurse Suaking also knew that the PMCED doctor ordered Mr. Gil to be monitored for “chest pain and palpitations,” and to be brought back to PMCED if those symptoms occurred. (Id.) Nevertheless, Nurse Suaking failed to implement a directive to monitor Mr. Gil for chest pains and palpitations. (Id.)

Less than an hour later, during the booking process, Mr. Gil lost his balance and fell. (SAC ¶ 50.) Unknown deputies then placed Mr. Gil in a wheelchair to prevent him from falling again. (Id.) According to the San Diego Medical Examiner's report, unknown deputies had a difficult time processing Mr. Gil due to him being “under the influence.” (Id.) Based on their “wrong and unreasonable assumption that Mr. Gil was ‘heavily' under the influence, and in disregard of the PMCED discharge instructions, Defendants Suaking, DOE nurses, and DOE Deputies made the decision to place Mr. Gil in a holding cell to ‘sober up' without conducting further medical assessments and without ensuring Mr. Gil would be monitored for chest pains, palpitations, and high glucose levels.” (Id.)

Mr. Gil was placed in the holding cell, alone, at 3:44 a.m., and ignored for the next 14 hours. (SAC ¶ 51.) At some point, Nurse Suaking left her shift without endorsing Mr. Gil to the follow-on shift, ensuring that Mr. Gil would continue to be ignored by the medical staff. (Id. ¶ 52.) At 8:34 a.m., five hours after being placed in the holding cell, Mr. Gil removed his pants and defecated all over himself and the cell, and fell on his side in front of the cell door. (Id. ¶ 53.) For the next nine and a half hours, no one checked on Mr. Gil. (Id.) An hour before he was discovered, at 5:21 p.m., Mr. Gil stopped moving and was unresponsive, lying on the floor of the cell. (Id.) Two minutes later, a DOE deputy looked into the cell and left. (Id.) At 6:03 p.m., Mr. Gil was discovered dead and cold to the touch. (Id. ¶ 54.)

On May 16, 2023, Plaintiffs Jennifer Schmidt and Lyndzy Biondo filed this lawsuit against the County of San Diego, Nurse Suaking and various Doe sheriff deputies, nurses and supervisors. On August 28, 2023, Plaintiffs filed the First Amended Complaint (“FAC”), charging the County and other defendants with deliberate indifference to Mr. Gil's serious medical needs and asserting three federal causes of action for violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and four state-based causes of action. Defendants moved to dismiss the FAC arguing, among other things, that Plaintiffs lacked standing.

On December 20, 2023, this Court granted the motion to dismiss with leave to amend finding that Plaintiffs lacked standing because they failed to provide any facts supporting the contention that Mr. Gil was Plaintiffs' “natural parent” under California Probate Code § 6453. Because Plaintiffs failed to establish standing, the Court did not reach the other issues raised in the motion to dismiss.

On January 10, 2024, Plaintiffs filed the SAC and on January 11 2024 Jennifer Schmidt filed another declaration in support of their contention that they have standing because Mr. Gil was their “natural parent.” Defendants responded by filing the pending motion to dismiss that...