Winzer v. Kaufman County

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
• Decided: March 28, 2024
• Docket: 23-10383
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

Case: 23-10383 Document: 72-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/28/2024

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit

FILED ____________ March 28, 2024 No. 23-10383 Lyle W. Cayce ____________ Clerk

Eunice J. Winzer, Individually and on behalf of the statutory beneficiaries of Gabriel A. Winzer; Sohelia Winzer,

Plaintiffs—Appellants,

versus

Kaufman County,

Defendant—Appellee. ______________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:15-CV-1284 ______________________________

Before Elrod, Oldham, and Wilson, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam: * This is a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Kaufman County sheriff’s deputies shot and killed Gabriel Winzer. Appellants brought a Fourth Amendment ex- cessive force claim against the deputies and the County. The district court found that no constitutional violation occurred, so it ruled for the defendants on all claims. A panel of this court affirmed the district court’s disposition

_____________________ * This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5. Case: 23-10383 Document: 72-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/28/2024

No. 23-10383

with respect to the deputy defendants. Winzer v. Kaufman Cnty., 916 F.3d 464 (5th Cir. 2019) (per curiam). But it found a factual dispute as to whether one deputy committed a constitutional violation, so it reversed the district court’s grant of summary judgment to the County as premature. Id. After further proceedings on remand, the County once more moved for summary judgment, arguing plaintiffs failed as a matter of law to establish the prerequisites for municipal liability under Monell v. Dep’t of Soc. Servs. of City of New York, 436 U.S. 658 (1978). The district court granted the motion, and plaintiffs timely appealed. We have carefully considered the appeal in light of the briefs, oral argument, opinion of the district court, and pertinent portions of the record. Having done so, we find no reversible error of fact or law. AFFIRMED.