Allaedhin Qandah v. Michael McKee

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedJune 8, 2022
Docket21-1758
StatusUnpublished

This text of Allaedhin Qandah v. Michael McKee (Allaedhin Qandah v. Michael McKee) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Allaedhin Qandah v. Michael McKee, (8th Cir. 2022).

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________

No. 21-1758 ___________________________

Allaedhin Qandah

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee

v.

St. Charles County

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant

Michael McKee, Officer; Jeffery Cast, Officer

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants - Appellants

Clinton Graebner, Officer; Jake Gillett, in his individual capacity

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants ____________

Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis ____________

Submitted: April 1, 2022 Filed: June 8, 2022. [Unpublished] ____________

Before GRUENDER, ERICKSON, and GRASZ, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM.

In this interlocutory appeal, St. Charles County Jail (SCCJ) corrections officers Jeffery Cast and Michael McKee appeal the district court’s denial of qualified immunity as to former SCCJ detainee Allaedhin Qandah’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims. We affirm in part and reverse in part.

We conclude the district court properly denied Cast qualified immunity on Qandah’s failure-to-protect claim. See Brown v. Fortner, 518 F.3d 552, 558 (8th Cir. 2008) (standard of review); see also Shannon v. Koehler, 616 F.3d 855, 861 (8th Cir. 2010) (limiting appellate review of denial of qualified immunity to determining whether conduct, as factually supported under summary judgment standard, violated a plaintiff’s clearly established rights). We conclude, however, McKee was entitled to qualified immunity on Qandah’s claim that McKee was deliberately indifferent to his medical needs, as the “facts that the district court assumed when it viewed the record in the light most favorable to [Qandah]” do not demonstrate Qandah had a serious medical need or that McKee was aware of such a need and failed to respond reasonably to it. See McCaster v. Clausen, 684 F.3d 740, 745-47 (8th Cir. 2012); cf. Jones v. Minn. Dep’t of Corr., 512 F.3d 478, 482-83 (8th Cir. 2008).

Accordingly, we affirm the denial of qualified immunity as to Cast, reverse the denial of qualified immunity as to McKee, and remand this case for further proceedings. ______________________________

-2-

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Shannon v. Koehler
616 F.3d 855 (Eighth Circuit, 2010)
Marchello McCaster v. Mary Clausen
684 F.3d 740 (Eighth Circuit, 2012)
Brown v. Fortner
518 F.3d 552 (Eighth Circuit, 2008)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Allaedhin Qandah v. Michael McKee, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/allaedhin-qandah-v-michael-mckee-ca8-2022.