By Alethia Kasben
Gongwer News Service
A juvenile detention center licensed by the state is not immune from litigation stemming from the death of a 15-year-old at the facility, the Michigan Court of Appeals ruled last week.
In Personal Representatives of the Estate of JQ v. Spectrum Juvenile Justice Services (COA Docket No. 363750), a published decision dated Thursday, the panel upheld lower courts in denying summary disposition for Spectrum Juvenile Justice Services, which runs the Calumet juvenile detention center where JQ, the 15-year-old at the center of the case, died by suicide in 2018.
Spectrum Juvenile Justice Services, which is licensed by the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services, argued it was immune under the Social Services Agency Liability Act.
The Court of Appeals, in an opinion written by Judge Anica Letica and signed onto by Judge Kathleen Feeney, and a separate concurrence by Judge Kristina Robinson Garrett, disagreed, upholding previous decisions by trial courts.
Testimony in the case included multiple staff members who said welfare checks of residents were not followed, and it was discovered that staff were instructed to pre-fill out forms indicating room checks were completed at the beginning of their shifts. Staff also indicated they were not well equipped or trained to handle the juveniles at the facility, and there was no indication that JQ’s journal entries, which showed his declining mental state, were reviewed or acted upon.
That evidence “creates a genuine issue of material fact regarding whether the actions and inactions of staff members amounted to gross negligence such that (Spectrum Juvenile Justice Services) is not immune under the SSALA,” the opinion says.
“The evidence supports plaintiffs’ allegations that staff members failed to conduct room checks at varying intervals not to exceed 15 minutes as required under Rule 400.4127(4) notwithstanding that the purpose of the room checks was to ensure resident safety,” the opinion says. “Further, JQ’s journal entries indicate that he became increasingly more depressed and anxious as the days passed. The testimony also establishes a genuine issue of material fact regarding youth-care workers being trained to fill out the pink sheets at the beginning of their shifts before the room checks could possibly be made, that some supervisors also prefilled out the pink sheets, and that some workers forged their supervisor’s signature.”
The Court of Appeals also ruled there is a genuine issue of material fact regarding foreseeability as it pertains to plaintiffs’ negligent hiring or retention claim.
Further, the court did reverse the trial court on comparative fault, ruling that it presents a question for the jury.
“JQ’s intentional act of committing suicide must be considered, and his age, 15 years old at the time of his death, does not relieve him from fault for the commission of an intentional act,” the ruling says.
Although Garrett concurred with the majority opinion, she wrote separately on the comparative fault issue, which she wrote that she “reluctantly” agreed with the majority on.
She wrote in this case, the standard does not seem appropriate.
“Defendants were responsible for JQ’s welfare and supervision, and staff members failed to monitor him as required despite his journal entries indicating his increasing depression and anxiety in addition to other evidence indicative of self-harm,” she wrote. “Further, as plaintiffs assert, it is illogical to allow defendants to claim as a defense or mitigation of damages that JQ engaged in the act that plaintiffs assert defendants negligently failed to prevent.”
Gongwer News Service
A juvenile detention center licensed by the state is not immune from litigation stemming from the death of a 15-year-old at the facility, the Michigan Court of Appeals ruled last week.
In Personal Representatives of the Estate of JQ v. Spectrum Juvenile Justice Services (COA Docket No. 363750), a published decision dated Thursday, the panel upheld lower courts in denying summary disposition for Spectrum Juvenile Justice Services, which runs the Calumet juvenile detention center where JQ, the 15-year-old at the center of the case, died by suicide in 2018.
Spectrum Juvenile Justice Services, which is licensed by the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services, argued it was immune under the Social Services Agency Liability Act.
The Court of Appeals, in an opinion written by Judge Anica Letica and signed onto by Judge Kathleen Feeney, and a separate concurrence by Judge Kristina Robinson Garrett, disagreed, upholding previous decisions by trial courts.
Testimony in the case included multiple staff members who said welfare checks of residents were not followed, and it was discovered that staff were instructed to pre-fill out forms indicating room checks were completed at the beginning of their shifts. Staff also indicated they were not well equipped or trained to handle the juveniles at the facility, and there was no indication that JQ’s journal entries, which showed his declining mental state, were reviewed or acted upon.
That evidence “creates a genuine issue of material fact regarding whether the actions and inactions of staff members amounted to gross negligence such that (Spectrum Juvenile Justice Services) is not immune under the SSALA,” the opinion says.
“The evidence supports plaintiffs’ allegations that staff members failed to conduct room checks at varying intervals not to exceed 15 minutes as required under Rule 400.4127(4) notwithstanding that the purpose of the room checks was to ensure resident safety,” the opinion says. “Further, JQ’s journal entries indicate that he became increasingly more depressed and anxious as the days passed. The testimony also establishes a genuine issue of material fact regarding youth-care workers being trained to fill out the pink sheets at the beginning of their shifts before the room checks could possibly be made, that some supervisors also prefilled out the pink sheets, and that some workers forged their supervisor’s signature.”
The Court of Appeals also ruled there is a genuine issue of material fact regarding foreseeability as it pertains to plaintiffs’ negligent hiring or retention claim.
Further, the court did reverse the trial court on comparative fault, ruling that it presents a question for the jury.
“JQ’s intentional act of committing suicide must be considered, and his age, 15 years old at the time of his death, does not relieve him from fault for the commission of an intentional act,” the ruling says.
Although Garrett concurred with the majority opinion, she wrote separately on the comparative fault issue, which she wrote that she “reluctantly” agreed with the majority on.
She wrote in this case, the standard does not seem appropriate.
“Defendants were responsible for JQ’s welfare and supervision, and staff members failed to monitor him as required despite his journal entries indicating his increasing depression and anxiety in addition to other evidence indicative of self-harm,” she wrote. “Further, as plaintiffs assert, it is illogical to allow defendants to claim as a defense or mitigation of damages that JQ engaged in the act that plaintiffs assert defendants negligently failed to prevent.”
––––––––––––––––––––
Subscribe to the Legal News!
https://www.legalnews.com/Home/Subscription
Full access to public notices, articles, columns, archives, statistics, calendar and more
Day Pass Only $4.95!
One-County $80/year
Three-County & Full Pass also available
