Dezmen McBride was booked into custody at the W.C. “Dub” Brassell Detention Center on May 21, 2021. McBride died 15 days later on June 5, 2021, at the age of 18 years old.
Deborah McBride commenced this action alleging that County Defendants and Separate Defendant Lieutenant Samuel Baker, Jr., in his individual capacity: were deliberately indifferent to McBride’s serious medical needs; used excessive force against McBride; were negligent; were liable for McBride’s wrongful death; violated the Equal Protection Clause; and intentionally inflicted emotional distress on McBride. After McBride’s death, Tanaria Heard was substituted as the Special Administrator of the Estate of Dezmen McBride.
County Defendants requested that the Court exclude the testimony of William Rutledge because, according to County Defendants, Rutledge’s testimony and opinions “would not assist the trier of fact, contain irrelevant opinions and a legal opinion, invade the province of the jury, contain speculation, and would causes [sic] juror confusion in the least.”
General Surgery Expert Witness
William L. Rutledge spent four years as the medical director of Forest Park Medical Clinic and Cumberland Park Medical Clinic, besides serving as an adjunct faculty member in the biology department of Arkansas Baptist College.
For nearly two years prior, Rutledge was a research assistant professor for University of Arkansas’ Department of Surgery. He spent a handful of years before as a staff physician, educator, and medical director, preceded by 16 years as a general surgeon for Arkansas Surgical Associates/William L. Rutledge M.D., P.A.
Rutledge also performed duties as a surgeon for Arkansas Trauma Surgeons, LLC from 1997 to 2000, and was the medial director for Meharry Alcohol and Drug Abuse Program in Nashville, Tennessee, from 1982 to 1984.
Discussion by the Court
The County Defendants argued that Rutledge’s claim that County Defendants’ deliberate indifference was the cause of McBride’s death is a legal conclusion only the Court can make. Conversely, Heard contended that Rutledge’s opinions touching on a jury question shouldn’t lead to his testimony being excluded.
Rutledge’s report dated June 12, 2024, concerns whether the care that McBride received was proper and within care standards. Additionally, in his report, Rutledge provides his professional opinion in this matter based on a review of the following: the medical examiner’s report; medical records from Jefferson Regional Medical Center; attorney notes of timeline; call log and incident report from Jefferson County Sheriff’s Department; and a summary of the investigation.
Rutledge offered many opinions in his report, and he stated that he gave those opinions “with a reasonable degree of medical certainty.” Specifically, Rutledge opined, in part, that “although the CT scan showed no intracranial hemorrhage, McBride clearly exhibited multiple signs of increased intracranial pressure.” For example, McBride exhibited nausea, vomiting, headaches, visual changes, changes in behavior, weakness, inability to stand and walk, confusion, and possible seizure activity. Furthermore, Rutledge also opined that the failure to get McBride evaluated and treated between June 2, 2021, and June 5, 2021, “more probably than not caused his demise.” In addition, Rutledge opined that “McBride progressively worsened” on June 2, 3, and 4, 2021, “as personnel were deliberately indifferent.” Ultimately, Rutledge’s report concluded that “[t]he delay in diagnosis and treatment of Dezmen McBride due to deliberate indifference by jail personnel and nursing personnel led to his death on June 5, 2021.”
Analysis
County Defendants asserted that Rutledge’s opinion is “unhelpful to the trier of fact considering the prevailing law, and threatens to cause jury confusion—particularly in a case that is not complex .”
However, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals has determined in a series of cases that, when alleging a violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 based on an alleged delay in medical treatment, a Plaintiff’s failure to offer such evidence is fatal to his claim.
Therefore, the Court ruled that Rutledge’s opinions are relevant to the issues in this matter—namely whether County Defendants were deliberately indifferent to McBride’s medical needs and consequently contributed to or caused McBride’s death.
Moreover, that the state crime lab found McBride’s cause of death to be undetermined does not negate the relevancy of Rutledge’s opinions on McBride’s cause of death.
Proving deliberate indifference requires that the Plaintiff “prove that officials knew about excessive risks to his health but disregarded them and that their unconstitutional actions in fact caused his injuries.” In this case, what County Defendants knew, what they did or did not do in response to that knowledge, and how quickly they acted or failed to act are all among the many questions of fact for the jury to determine.
Because Rutledge’s testimony that County Defendants were deliberately indifferent is “not a fact-based opinion, but a statement of legal conclusion,” the Court excluded Rutledge’s testimony using this precise legal phrase.
Held
The Court granted, in part, and denied, in part, County Defendants’
Daubert motion in limine to exclude Dr. William L. Rutledge’s report.
Key Takeaway:
While the Court found Rutledge’s medical opinions on the propriety of care, the progression of McBride’s condition, and the potential cause of death to be relevant to the claim of deliberate indifference, it excluded Rutledge’s direct statement that the “personnel were deliberately indifferent” and that the “delay in diagnosis and treatment…due to deliberate indifference…led to his death” because the Court deemed these statements to be legal conclusions, not fact-based opinions, which are reserved for the Court to decide.
Case Details:
| Case Caption: | Heard V. Association Of Arkansas Counties Risk Management Fund Et Al |
| Docket Number: | 4:24cv325 |
| Court: | United States District Court, Arkansas Eastern |
| Order Date: | April 04, 2025 |
Leave a Reply