United States Ninth Circuit

In a suit by the estate of a man whose death followed alleged mistreatment and the threat of further incarceration in a county jail, the judgment of the district court in favor of the defendants is reversed and remanded, where: 1) the district court's ruling that the decedent's sister could not testify to what he told her about events at the jail was a prejudicial abuse of discretion, as the testimony was admissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 803(3) because her statements were offered to establish decedent’s state of mind; 2) the district court erred by excluding references to the pink underwear, and that, unexplained and undefended, the dress-out in pink appeared to be punishment without legal justification, so this due process question is open for exploration at trial on remand; 3) the admissibility of the medical testimony issue is not reached because as the case developed under the district court's rulings, the testimony lacked all foundation; and 4) the district court improperly eliminated the plaintiff's opportunity for rebuttal argument. The amended opinion additionally concluded that on remand plaintiff may prevail on the proposition that for the jail to apply the dress-out in pink procedure automatically to a man its own staff had identified as in need of psychiatric treatment was in deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs. (Amended opinion)

Appellate Information

• Decided 12/30/2013
• Published 12/30/2013

Judges

• NOONAN

Court

• United States Ninth Circuit

Counsel