Cox v Glanz

Cox sued Glanz under 42 USC 1983 alleging personal and official liability for the suicide of her son while in jail. Glanz moved for summary judgment on several grounds including qualified immunity. The district court denied the motion. The panel reversed in part and dismissed in part. It held that it had jurisdiction over the individual immunity claim as the district court tacitly denied it and Glanz assumed the facts as pleaded by Cox on appeal and the issue of whether the law was clearly established din 2009 was a pure legal one. It held that both parties briefing go the immunity issue at the district court was inadequate and thus any forfeiture by Glanz was overcome by Cox’s failure to meet her burden to prove a clearly established right. The panel held that there was no clearly established right to suicide prevention when a prisoner was not expressing suicidal thoughts as of 2009 as circuit precedent required knowledge of the risk of suicide and here nether the intake counselor, the mental health nurse who tried to see Cox’s son nor Glanz had any personal knowledge of any risk of suicide. Thus, summary judgment on the individual claim had to be granted. The panel dismissed as to the official capacity claim as review is not available for denials of summary judgment to entities and the questions involved were not inextricably intertwined and thus pendant jurisdiction was also not available.