Officers were on notice, based on prior cases finding "compression asphyxia," that keeping a person who was in a state of "excited delirium" restrained with his or her chest to the ground while applying pressure to the back and ignoring pleas that the subject could not breathe constituted excessive force under the Fourth Amendment. They were therefore not entitled to qualified immunity in a lawsuit alleging that they caused a man's death by restraint or positional asphyxiation by keeping him prone and handcuffed while in an agitated state, suffocating him under their weight. Arce v. Blackwell, No. 06-17302, 2008 U.S. App. Lexis 20162 (Unpub. 9th Cir.).
     Although a man suffering from delusions attacked a psychiatric hospital staff member, the defendants knew that restraining him face-down on the floor and putting pressure on a his back posed a substantial risk of asphyxiation. "Despite knowledge of this risk, defendants chose to restrain [the deceased] using these dangerous restraint techniques. Their actions were objectively unreasonable given the fact that [an] eyewitness testified that [the] defendants continued to restrain [him] in this dangerous position ..." He had been brought to the hospital for a mental health assessment by Sheriff's Department personnel who found him wandering the countryside. During the attempt to restrain him, he stopped breathing, never regained consciousness, and died. The appeals court rejected claims by certain defendants for qualified immunity in a federal civil rights lawsuit brought by the decedent's estate. Lanman v. Hinson, #06-2263, 2008 U.S. App. Lexis 12682, 2008 Fed App. 0212P (6th Cir.).
     Deputy sheriffs were not entitled to qualified immunity in a lawsuit alleging that they used excessive force in removing a morbidly obese man from a courtroom after he was found in contempt of court, causing him to die after several deputies allegedly placed themselves on his back while he was on the floor. Hostility by the deputies to the man could support a finding that they were trying to punish him at the time. Both Fourth Amendment and Eighth Amendment claims were reinstated. Appeals court also rules that removal of the decedent's mother to another courtroom via wheelchair was necessary and did not involve the use of excessive force. Richman v. Sheahan, No. 07-1487, 2008 U.S. App. Lexis 200 (7th Cir.).
     A reasonable officer would know that administering closed-fist punches and flashlight blows to the head, after an arrestee was handcuffed, and continuing to strike him after he had stopped resisting arrest -- and failing to place him in the proper position after hobbling him -- was excessive force. The officers were not entitled to qualified immunity. Sallenger v. Oakes, #05-3470, 2007 U.S. App. Lexis 436, 2007 WL 60422 (7th Cir.) [N/R]
     In a lawsuit over the death of a man weighing almost 350 pounds with PCP and cocaine in his bloodstream who allegedly struggled with police and resisted their attempts to arrest him outside a fast food restaurant, the plaintiffs claimed that the officers used excessive force, unnecessarily striking him with metal batons and causing him to suffer respiratory failure from positional asphyxia when they sat on him, after spraying a chemical irritant (pepper spray) in his face. The trial court found that the plaintiffs sufficiently stated a claim that the officers who apprehended him used excessive force against him, as the confrontation began simply because firefighters who encountered him perceived him as creating a "nuisance," which is "not the type of crime" permitting officers to use a greater use of force. It was disputed whether the decedent subsequently was resisting arrest, or was simply trying to position himself so that he could breathe. Additionally, the plaintiffs in the case alleged that the officers used pepper spray against the decedent after he was already face down and was being handcuffed, which the court stated, if true, could also constitute an excessive use of force. The officers were not entitled to qualified immunity because a reasonable officer might have known that engaging in the alleged acts violated the decedent's right to be free from excessive force. The court granted a motion to dismiss claims by the plaintiffs against the firefighters, who left the scene before some of the incidents that resulted in the decedent's death, and against police supervisors and a fire chief. It denied a motion to dismiss claims against the police officers involved in the incident. Jones v. City of Cincinnati, No. 1:04-CV-616, 2006 U.S. Dist. Lexis 75430, 2006 WL 2987820 (S.D. Ohio). [N/R]
     Police officers' use of a vascular neck restraint on an arrestee was not excessive force when the arrestee physically resisted being handcuffed, even though the arrestee died shortly thereafter from positional asphyxia. No evidence showed that the restraint was continued for any extended period, and one of the officers stated that the arrestee had attempted to reach for his gun. The neck restraint used was not considered deadly force. Griffith v. Coburn, No. 04-CV-728, 408 F. Supp. 2d 491 (W.D. Mich. 2005). [N/R]
     Town was not liable, on the basis of alleged inadequate training, for the death of a drug-intoxicated arrestee in the course of an arrest, allegedly through positional asphyxia. The court found that the town did not have information about the risks of a cocaine-induced excited delirium and the potential serious consequences of a prone restraint of such an arrestee, and therefore did not act with deliberate indifference in failing to train its officers concerning such circumstances. Watkins v. New Castle County, No. CIV.A. 03-791, 374 F. Supp.2d 379 (D. Del. 2005). [N/R]
     Parents of mentally ill man who died, allegedly of positional asphyxia, after being taken into custody by police officers, stated a claim for violation of his civil rights by asserting that the officers, who transported him to a hospital, handcuffed and hog-tied, in a face-down position, had noticed his irregular breathing, but failed to adjust his position at that time. Court also finds a possibly viable claim for disability discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. Sec. 12132, based on alleged failure to provide adequate training for officers in handling encounters with mentally ill persons. Arnold v. City of York, No. 4:CV-03-1352, 340 F. Supp. 2d 550 (M.D. Pa. 2004). [N/R]
     Michigan appeals court upholds jury award of $533,087.62 against police officer for asphyxiation death of cocaine-intoxicated man who threatened to kill the officer and his partner. While jury found the decedent to be 50% responsible for his own death, it did not clearly attribute his comparative negligence solely to his drug use, which would have barred liability. Smith v. Detroit, #247154, 2004 Mich. App. Lexis 3500 (Unpub. 2004). [2005 LR Feb]
     Federal appeals court upholds $900,000 jury award to family of adult non-verbal autistic man who died after officers seeking to restrain him allegedly continued to use pepper spray and to lay on top of his body after he was handcuffed, hobbled, and laying on his stomach on the ground, no longer resisting. Continued use of such force at that point, the court rules, violated clearly established law, and jury's award was not excessive. Champion v. Outlook Nashville, Inc., No. 03-5068, 380 F.3d 893 (6th Cir. 2004). [2004 LR Nov]
     County was properly held liable for death of arrestee subjected to "total appendage restraint procedure," when expert testimony indicated that he died of positional asphyxia, but jury's assessment of damages at $2 million was excessive when decedent had limited future financial prospects, and probably would have been sent back to prison, had he survived, for firing a gun at passing motorists in a busy intersection. Nelson v. County of Los Angeles, #B161431, 113 Cal. App. 4th 783, 6 Cal. Rptr. 3d 650 (Cal. App. 2003). [2004 LR Mar]
     Officers' alleged actions of pressing their weight onto the neck and torso of a mentally ill detainee as he lay handcuffed on the ground and begged for air, if true, constituted an excessive use of force for which the officers were not entitled to qualified immunity. Drummond v. City of Anaheim, No. 02-55320, 343 F. 3d 1052 (9th Cir. 2003). [2003 LR Dec]
     Use of hog-tie restraint against arrestee who had a head wound and had been sprayed with pepper spray, and was also allegedly compliant at the time of the restraint, was an excessive use of force, and officers were not entitled to qualified immunity from possible liability for arrestee's subsequent death from positional asphyxia. There was also evidence to show that county officers widely used hog-tie restraints but that no training in the use of such restraints was provided. Garrett v. Unified Government of Athens-Clarke County, 246 F. Supp. 2d 1262 (M.D. Ga. 2003). [2003 LR Jul]
     340:60 Federal appeals court rules that hog-tie restraints should not be used when it presents a significant risk to a suspect's health or well being because of diminished mental capacity, whether based on intoxication or a mental condition; officers were individually entitled to qualified immunity, but inadequate training claims against city could go forward in lawsuit over death of naked man who died after being restrained with hog-tie. Cruz v. City of Laramie, No. 99-8045, 99-8049, 99-8050, 239 F.3d 1183 (10th Cir. 2001).
     327:43 Appeals court upholds jury verdict in favor of police officers in lawsuit over alleged positional asphyxia in case where they used kneeling wristlock on disturbed man to take him into protective custody; use of courtroom demonstration of kneeling wristlock technique was properly admitted into evidence. Jones v. Ralls, #98-3514, 187 F.3d 848 (8th Cir. 1999).
     310:156 Plaintiff in excessive force case against police involving "positional asphyxia" could not compel deposition of defendants' lawyer regarding his personal knowledge of the dangers of "positional asphyxia" when plaintiff failed to show that information was unobtainable through other means, relevant and non-privileged, and crucial to preparation of the case. Jones v. Bd. of Police Com'rs of Kansas City, Mo., 176 F.R.D. 625 (W.D. Mo. 1997).
     311:171 Trial court, relying on new study, concludes that "positional asphyxia" was not cause of arrestee's death, questions entire scientific basis for "positional asphyxia." Price v. County of San Diego, 990 F.Supp. 1230 (S.D. Cal. 1998). Editor's Note: The study relied on by the trial court in the decision above has been published as JL Clausen, TC Chan, T Neuman, & GM Vilke, "Restraint Position and Positional Asphyxia" in Vol. 30 Annals of Emergency Medicine, p. 578-586 (Nov. 1997).
     289:12 Federal court rules that some documents concerning county's process of formulating policy on "hogtying" of suspects are discoverable in lawsuit brought by surviving family of arrestee who died after allegedly being hogtied Price v. County of San Diego, 165 F.R.D. 614 (SDCa 1996).
     296:115 Estate of man who died from asphyxia after being placed face down while hog-tied receives $805,000 settlement from city on inadequate supervision and training lawsuit Kinneer v. Gall, U.S. Dist. Ct., SD Ohio, No C2-95-504, Sept 6, 1996, 40 ATLA L.Rptr. 132 (May 1997).
     {N/R} Officers entitled to qualified immunity in lawsuit brought by estate of arrestee who allegedly died of positional asphyxiation Cottrell v. Caldwell, 85 F.3d 1480 (11th Cir. 1996).
     {N/R} Officers entitled to qualified immunity and plaintiff failed to establish deprivation of constitutional right pursuant to municipal policy and custom in case where detainee allegedly denied of positional asphyxiation after officers attempted to remove him from hotel room he refused to vacate Phillips v. City of Milwaukee, 928 F.Supp. 817 (E.D. Wis 1996).
     {N/R} Trial court judge denies city's motion for summary judgment in federal civil rights lawsuit brought by estate of intoxicated detainee who allegedly died of positional asphyxiation Animashaun v. Chicago Police, 1995 U.S. Dist Lexis 2074 (N.D.Ill. 1995), (motion for reconsideration denied), and 1994 U.S. Dist Lexis 17339 (N.D.Ill. 1994), (city's initial motion for summary judgment denied).
     Editor's Note: Also see, Owens v. City of Atlanta, 780 F2d 1564 (11th Cir. 1986), ("Stretch" position on unruly arrestees upheld, despite death from asphyxiation); Vizbaras v. Prieber, 761 F2d 1013 (4th Cir. 1985), (No liability for death of arrestee who died of asphyxiation after being cradle cuffed).