Williams v. Miniard

1

QIAN WILLIAMS, Plaintiff, v. CHRIS MINIARD, et al., Defendants.

No. 1:22-cv-1 Dlott, J.

United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Western Division

February 9, 2023

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Karen L. Litkovitz United States Magistrate Judge

On October 21, 2021, incarcerated plaintiff Qian Williams initiated a pro se civil rights action in the Butler County Ohio Court of Common Pleas. (See Doc. 1-1). Plaintiff sued Butler County, Ohio Sheriff Richard K. Jones1and deputy sheriff Chris Miniard^[1]for state and federal law violations based on an alleged use of force while plaintiff was a federal pretrial detainee on September 13, 2019. (See id.; Doc. 3). On January 3, 2022, defendants removed the action to this Court. (Doc. 1). This matter is before the Court the parties' cross-motions for summary judgment (Docs. 21 33), their responses in opposition (Docs. 23, 38, and 46) and defendants' reply memorandum (Doc. 48).

I. Factual Background^[2]

In September 2019, plaintiff was a federal pretrial detainee who was held at the Butler County Jail pending the resolution of his federal criminal charges. When he entered the Butler County Jail in 2017, he had a history of a right ankle injury from a motorcycle accident, resulting in surgery to insert pins and a rod in his ankle. (Plf. Dep., Doc. 32, PAGEID 174-76, 188). Shortly after his booking, plaintiff submitted a “Butler County Sheriff's Office Medical Services Request for Inmate/Detainee Care,” on November 3, 2017, complaining that the “screws in my ankel [sic] hurts.” (Fisher Decl. Ex. 3; see also Plf. Dep. Doc. 32, PAGEID 230-31).

On each day of his federal criminal trial, plaintiff was transported by Butler County sheriff deputies to the federal courthouse in Cincinnati, Ohio. On September 13, 2019, the third day of the trial, non-party Deputy Joseph Crawford prepared plaintiff for transport to the federal courthouse. (Doc. 33, Fisher Decl., Ex. 6). Plaintiff was brought from his cell into the jail's booking area, where Deputy Crawford then attempted to place the necessary restraints on plaintiff. (Id.).

Defendants have submitted a videorecording of the events at the jail's booking area. (Doc. 22, Butler County Jail video at 00:00-02:02). On the videorecording,^[3]plaintiff is seated on a bench in the booking area of the jail with his hands restrained in handcuffs. Deputy Crawford stands in front of plaintiff. Defendant Miniard stands off to plaintiff's left side. Plaintiff and Deputy Crawford are talking. Deputy Crawford reaches down for plaintiff's right ankle as defendant Miniard walks from plaintiff's left side, in front of plaintiff, and over to plaintiff's right side. Defendant Miniard reaches down and pulls up plaintiff's right leg for Deputy Crawford to place a restraint on plaintiff's right ankle. Defendant Miniard forcefully pushes plaintiff's right leg down, moves to plaintiff's left side, and pulls up plaintiff's left leg. Shortly after defendant Miniard pulls plaintiff's left leg in the air, plaintiff slides from his seat onto the floor with his back against the floor. Defendant Miniard then secures a restraint on plaintiff's left ankle. Plaintiff is then lifted off the floor by defendant Miniard and seated at the bench. Defendant Miniard then walks plaintiff out of the booking area. Plaintiff can be seen limping or hobbling as defendant Miniard holds plaintiff's arm. (Id.).

Defendants present evidence that when Deputy Crawford attempted to place plaintiff's ankles in leg restraints, plaintiff resisted and made verbal demands that the deputy use the “bear claws,” which are larger restraints than standard leg shackles. (Doc. 33, Fisher Decl., Ex. 6; Miniard Decl., ¶¶ 5-7). Deputy Crawford informed plaintiff that the traditional shackles “would be sufficient,” but plaintiff “refused to put them on and pulled his legs away....” (Id., Fisher Decl., Ex. 6). Plaintiff was given multiple direct commands to surrender his feet for shackling, but he refused. (Id., Fisher Decl., Ex. 5-6). Defendants present evidence that after plaintiff's right leg was shackled, defendant Miniard lifted plaintiff's left leg to apply a shackle. Defendants' witnesses allege that after defendant Miniard lifted plaintiff's left leg, plaintiff slid off the stool and fell to the ground of his own volition. (Id., Fisher Decl., Ex. 4-6, Miniard Decl., ¶¶ 9-10). Once the left leg shackle was applied, plaintiff was stood up, walked to the transport vehicle, and was brought into the custody of the United States Marshal Service. (Id., Fisher Decl., Ex. 5-6, Miniard Decl., ¶¶ 12-15). The Marshals Service ended up taking plaintiff to the hospital, where plaintiff received a CT scan of his spine and X-rays of his right ankle and lumbar spine. Plaintiff was diagnosed with “acute right ankle pain” and released from the hospital later that same day. (Pl. Dep., Doc. 32 at PAGEID 217-18). Plaintiff testified that his left ankle was not injured on September 13, 2019. (Pl. Dep., Doc. 32 at PAGEID 224).

Plaintiff submitted two declarations^[4] in support of his Rule 56(d) motions, which are identical except that the latter adds several paragraphs. (Compare Doc. 39 at PAGEID 442-43 with Doc. 55 at PAGEID 634-37). In addition, plaintiff's “Motion to Suppres[s] deposition or Amend Statement” is unsworn but submitted under penalty of perjury consistent with 28 U.S.C. § 1746. (See Doc. 60 at PAGEID 674). As explained in the Court's prior Order (Doc. 65), plaintiff submitted this latter statement to clarify his deposition testimony regarding which of his legs was first restrained and by whom. (Compare Pl.'s Dep., Doc. 32 at PAGEID 195-96; 20205 (plaintiff's testimony that deputy Crawford shackled plaintiff's left ankle before defendant Miniard grabbed and shackled his right ankle) with Doc. 22, Butler County Jail video at 00:1400:20 (showing that deputy Crawford shackled plaintiff's right ankle, and the right ankle was shackled before defendant Miniard shackled the left)).^[5]

According to plaintiff, he repeatedly requested that the deputies use “bear claws” (larger restraints) to accommodate “the pins and rods in [his] ankle” but they refused. (Pl.'s Dep., Doc. 32 at PAGEID 194-98 and Pl.'s Decl., Doc. 55 at PAGEID 634). In his declaration, plaintiff states that defendant Miniard “heard [plaintiff] requesting . . . the Bear claws . . . because of [his] injury” before approaching. (Doc. 55 at PAGEID 634). Plaintiff states that on previous transports, other deputies had always acquiesced to this request to use the “bear claws.” (Doc. 32 at PAGEID 195, 197-98). Plaintiff states that once defendant Miniard lifted his right leg and deputy Crawford secured the shackle, defendant Miniard “slammed plaintiff's right leg back down to the floor causing extreme pain.” (Doc. 60 at PAGEID 669). Plaintiff states he told both deputies that the restraint was hurting and that it felt as if his ankle was broken. (Id.). Plaintiff testified that deputy Crawford had determined that he should get the “bear claws” until defendant Miniard intervened, said “I don't have time for this,” and proceeded to “grab” and yank” plaintiff's ankle in the air, causing plaintiff to fall on the floor. (Doc. 32 at PAGEID 204). Plaintiff states that he was unable to get up because of his right ankle injury, and another deputy assisted defendant Miniard in lifting plaintiff off the ground. (Doc. 60 at PAGEID 669). Plaintiff states that while defendant Miniard escorted plaintiff to the transport van, plaintiff hopped on his left leg due to his injured right leg. (Doc. 60 at PAGEID 669). Plaintiff states, “While hopping on my left leg I told officers that my leg feel like it's broke and the restraint[s] are hurting me and they ignored me.” (Id.). Plaintiff states that he remained in pain throughout his transport to the federal courthouse. (Doc. 55 at PAGEID 634). Plaintiff states that during the van transport, defendant Miniard threatened him and said he should have broken plaintiff's leg and right ankle because he did not think plaintiff's ankle had any injury. (Id.).

It is undisputed that, upon arriving at the federal courthouse, U.S. Marshal deputies determined that plaintiff's condition warranted medical attention, his leg restraints were removed, and he was taken to the hospital. Plaintiff was released back to the Butler County Jail that day same day.

On September 17, 2019, the Butler County Sheriff issued defendant Miniard a written reprimand related to the incident with plaintiff, which read:

This letter shall serve as an official written reprimand to you, for violation of Policy and Procedures 2.20 Attention to Duty, 35. Unsatisfactory Performance.

On Friday, September 13, 2019, Deputy Crawford was attempting to put ankle restraints on a federal inmate. The inmate was seated at the booking desk and was being uncooperative and argumentative. You assisted Deputy Crawford by lifting the inmate's right leg and successfully applying that restraint. You then lifted the inmate[']s left leg, and in the manner of doing so, caused the inmate to tilt back. At this point, it appears the inmate took this opportunity to use his momentum to intentionally fall from the seat. After reviewing the jail video and documentation from you and Deputy Crawford, I find your actions were unfavorable and exacerbated an already contentious situation.

Continued conduct of this nature cannot and will not be tolerated by this Office, and further violations will be cause for more severe action against you to include consideration for termination by Sheriff Jones.

(Doc. 33-3 at PAGEID 367).

II. Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment (Docs. 21, 33)

A. Summary judgment standard

A motion for summary judgment should be granted if the evidence submitted to the Court demonstrates...