Circuit court will not require plaintiff to hold up prior case with exact same fact pattern that put defendants on notice to defeat qualified immunity.

A pre-trial detainee died after experiencing delirium tremens while in custody at the county jail. The detainee had passed a mental health assessment but later showed signs of delirium tremens and was given no additional medical care before dying. 

The 6th Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with the U.S. District Court that qualified immunity was not appropriate. In doing so, the 6th Circuit set aside whether reliance on the mental health assessment was reasonable and stated that a jury could find that the detainee was in need of “some medical attention” in the hours following the mental health assessment. 

More interestingly, the defendants attempted to rely on the theory that the plaintiff absolutely needed to point to a specific prior case with the same fact pattern in order put them on notice that their conduct was wrong. That faulty argument was brushed aside by the 6th Circuit when it stated: “No case answers the precise question of whether it is reasonable to rely on a mental health professional to provide a medical assessment of a detainee exhibiting symptoms of delirium tremens. But to ask that question is to answer it.” 

This opinion shows that the 6th Circuit will not require a plaintiff to hold up a prior case with the exact same fact pattern that put the defendants on notice to defeat qualified immunity.
 

^{Case Law Alerts, 1st Quarter, April 2022 is prepared by Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers. This publication is not intended to provide legal advice for a specific situation or to create an attorney-client relationship. Copyright © 2022 Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin, all rights reserved. This article may not be reprinted without the express written permission of our firm.}