SACRAMENTO, Calif. (CN) — A wrongful death suit filed in federal court against Sacramento County and its Sheriff’s Office has passed a legal threshold and is advancing toward trial.
In an order entered with the court Wednesday, U.S. District Court Judge Troy L. Nunley found that the Sacramento County Sheriff’s Office and Sacramento County will remain defendants in a lawsuit brought over the death of Bryan Debbs but found certain other claims made in the 2020 suit won’t proceed.
According to the lawsuit, 33-year-old Bryan Debbs was attacked in July 2019 by a fellow inmate in the Sacramento County Jail. Debbs and his alleged assailant had been housed since May 25, 2019. On July 7, 2019, they were moved to a different unit based on a psychiatrist’s judgment.
The next day, a deputy checked on Debbs’ cell around 2:33 a.m. Nothing was noted at that time or during a 3 a.m. check. However, around 3:30 a.m., the deputy saw Debbs’ cellmate attacking him. The deputy called for help and requested fire and ambulance services to respond, Nunley's order states.
Debbs received medical care at Sutter Medical Center. He died Aug. 3, 2019. His death certificate noted the cause was “complications of neck compression.”
Sheriff’s officials didn’t publicly disclose the attack or his death until a local newspaper began investigating, the order states.
Attorney Paul Masuhara III — representing Debbs' estate and his mother, Shelley Debbs — said there are issues with how Debbs, who was mentally ill, was classified and housed with another inmate. Additionally, his cell had 24-hour surveillance video, though officials only discovered the attack during a routine check.
“Mr. Debbs was brutally attacked over the course of 20, 25 minutes,” Masuhara said.
In his order, Nunley agreed that a jury could find that the defendants' policies were the cause of Debbs' death.
“A reasonable jury could find that defendants knew or should have known that those monitoring policies were inadequate when housing two ‘gravely disabled’ inmates together,” Nunley found. “In sum, a reasonable jury could conclude defendants knew or should have known their policies created a substantial risk of serious harm to persons detained in the … cell and were deliberately indifferent to that risk. A reasonable jury could also conclude defendants’ policies caused Debbs’s injury.”
Masuhara said the claims the judge dismissed were ones he didn’t address in court filings. The main argument, alleging an Eighth Amendment violation, still stands.
“Next hearing we’re going to have is hopefully a trial-setting hearing,” Masuhara said.
Nunley gave both sides 30 days to file a joint status report stating their ability to move toward trial as well as potential trial dates.
The plaintiffs are asking for damages for loss of life and familial association, and for attorney’s fees.
A specific monetary amount isn’t listed in the suit. Masuhara said the case must first be proved. Then, if successful, the case would advance to a stage where damages are determined.
Ashley Calvillo, an attorney for the defendants, said she couldn’t discuss the pending litigation.
Subscribe to Closing Arguments
Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.
