Gregory May v. Michael F. Sheahan

Summary

The Seventh Circuit affirmed the denial of Cook County Sheriff Michael Sheahan’s motion to dismiss three constitutional claims brought by pretrial detainee Gregory May. The court held that the interlocutory qualified-immunity appeal remained justiciable despite subsequent attempted amendments to the complaint and concluded that May adequately alleged equal protection, access to the courts, and freedom from punitive bodily restraint violations involving hospital-detainee policies.

Holdings

1. A colorable interlocutory appeal from the denial of qualified immunity deprives the district court of jurisdiction to accept an amended complaint that would supersede the complaint at issue in the appeal.
2. May's allegations that hospital detainees were treated differently from jail detainees without a legitimate reason adequately stated an equal-protection claim, and the asserted right was clearly established for qualified-immunity purposes.
3. May's allegations that Sheahan's policies prevented court appearances, impeded access to counsel, and delayed his case adequately stated an access-to-the-courts claim, and the asserted right was clearly established.
4. May's allegation that he was shackled to his hospital bed around the clock despite his weakened condition and the continuous presence of armed guards adequately stated a substantive-due-process claim, and the asserted right was clearly established.

Questions Presented

1. Whether a district court may accept an amended complaint while an interlocutory appeal challenging the denial of qualified immunity is pending.
2. Whether May's allegations adequately stated an equal-protection claim and whether the asserted right was clearly established for qualified-immunity purposes.
3. Whether May's allegations adequately stated an access-to-the-courts claim and whether the asserted right was clearly established.
4. Whether May's allegations that he was shackled to his hospital bed around the clock adequately stated a substantive-due-process claim and whether the asserted right was clearly established.

Disposition

affirmed