Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
Date: 05-22-2024
Case Style:
Karl Hoeppner v. Tony Head, et al.
Case Number: 6:20-CV-299
Judge: Eric F. Melgren
Court: United States District Court for the Eastern District of Oklahoma (Muskogee County)
Plaintiff's Attorney: Byron D. Helm, Daniel E. Smolen, and Robert M. Blakemore
Defendant's Attorney: Andy A. Artus, Alison Levine, Jamison C. Whitson, Jordan L. Miller for Tony Head
Meaghan E. Clark and Sean M. McKelvey for City of Tushka, et al.
Description:
Muskogee, Oklahoma personal injury lawyers Byron D. Helm, Daniel E. Smolen, and Robert M. Blakemore who represented the Plaintiff as Special Administrator of the Estate of Michael James Hoeppner, deceased, who sued the Defendants on civil rights violation theories under 42 U.S.C. 1983.
"Section 1983 Litigation" refers to lawsuits brought under Section 1983 (Civil action for deprivation of rights) of Title 42 of the United States Code (42 U.S.C. § 1983). Section 1983 provides an individual the right to sue state government employees and others acting "under color of state law" for civil rights violations. Section 1983 does not provide civil rights; it is a means to enforce civil rights that already exist.
Michael Hoeppner was driving a refrigerated truck from Wisconsin through Tushka, Oklahoma, when Officer Charles Sanders initiated a traffic stop. Sanders received a call about a vehicle, which fit Hoeppner's truck's description, driving erratically. Sanders stopped Hoeppner believing that Hoeppner was on alcohol or drugs. When asked why he was driving erratically, Hoeppner replied that he was “just tired.” Hoeppner failed three field sobriety tests, but Sanders did not subject him to a breathalyzer. Sanders arrested Hoeppner and took him to Atoka County Medical Center (ACMC) for a toxicology screening.
At ACMC, Nurse Elizabeth Rains performed a toxicology screening by drawing blood. Rains did not check Hoeppner's medical history. According to Rains' testimony, Hoeppner's vitals were normal, except for his blood pressure, which was lower than normal. Rains noted in her charts that Hoeppner exhibited no signs or symptoms of distress and had even and unlabored breathing. When Rains asked if Hoeppner was okay, he responded, “yeah, I'm okay.” After Rains performed the blood draw, Sander took Hoeppner to the county jail.
Hoeppner was not a patient at ACMC and was there for evidence collection only. According to Dr. Susan Tiona, it is uncommon for a person who is present for an evidence collection blood draw to undergo medical clearance. Sanders did not ask Rains to clear Hoeppner for incarceration. At no time did Rains believe that Hoeppner needed medical attention.
Hoeppner died in jail, approximately twenty-four hours after being arrested. The medical examiner who performed the autopsy on Hoeppner determined that he died of bilateral, acute bronchopneumonia due to an influenza viral infection. Furthermore, Hoeppner did not have any drugs or alcohol in his system when he died.
Plaintiff filed this lawsuit against Rains on August 27, 2020, for a violation of 42 U.S.C. §1983. On October 22, 2021, Plaintiff served a subpoena duces tecum on ACMC for all medical records relating to Hoeppner, all nursing protocols by ACMC, and all treatment standing orders by ACMC from 2018 to the present. ACMC, a nonparty, moved to quash the subpoena. While the motion was pending, Rains filed the Motion for Summary Judgment. Plaintiff responded to the motion by claiming he “would be clearly prejudiced” if required to answer the motion for summary judgment before the ruling from the magistrate judge. The magistrate judge granted the motion to quash in part and denied it in part.
Outcome: "Section 1983 Litigation" refers to lawsuits brought under Section 1983 (Civil action for deprivation of rights) of Title 42 of the United States Code (42 U.S.C. § 1983). Section 1983 provides an individual the right to sue state government employees and others acting "under color of state law" for civil rights violations. Section 1983 does not provide civil rights; it is a means to enforce civil rights that already exist.
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments:
Find a Lawyer
Find a Case
