Page 4
Ninth Circuit:
Woman Kidnapped, Shot, Validly Stated Claim Against City
Panel Says Allegations That Police Dispatcher Convinced Mother Not to Pay Ransom Because Abduction Was a Hoax, Resulting in Attempt by Angered Perpetrators to Kill Victim, Gives Rise to Potential Liability
By a MetNews Staff Writer
|
|
|
MYA HENDRIX victim |
The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has reinstated a state claim for gross negligence against the City of San Diego based on a police dispatcher, who is also a defendant, having convinced a woman not to accede to a $2,500 ransom demand, assuring her that a supposed kidnapping of her daughter was a scam—when, in fact, it wasn’t.
Non-payment of the money angered the three abductors, resulting in a shooting of the victim three times, with one bullet causing a fall that severed her spinal cord.
Mya Hendrix, who was then 19, was rendered a quadriplegic by the shootings.
She had been held in a garage, subjected to Russian roulette, repeatedly tased, and, when the ransom was not paid, was taken to a coastal area, shot, and left for dead at a beach. Hendrix was discovered by tourists hours later in the water.
Duty Created
A three-judge panel—comprised of Ninth Circuit Judges Bridge Shelton Bade and Danielle J. Forrest, joined by Tenth Circuit Judge David M. Ebel, sitting by designation—held Wednesday that in rendering advice to the mother, Misti Hendrix, dispatcher Sue Marvin took affirmative steps that that increased the peril to her kidnapped daughter, creating special relationship that gave rise to a duty.
Marvin was one of three dispatchers with whom the mother spoke on April 11, 2018, and all three were named as defendants, along with the city. District Court Judge Todd W. Robinson of the Southern District of California, who dismissed the second amended complaint on June 2, 2022, ruled that “…Plaintiff has not set forth a plausible theory that the Dispatchers owed a duty to the Plaintiff.”
The memorandum opinion says:
“We disagree as to Marvin.”
Sufficient Pleading
The judges explained:
“The operative complaint sufficiently alleges that Marvin increased Mya’s danger by convincing her mother Misti Hendrix (Misti) that Mya’s kidnapping was a scam and that Misti should not pay the demanded ransom. Marvin told Misti that Mya’s situation sounded ‘exactly’ like a scam that dispatchers commonly received. Then, after learning about Mya’s drug addiction, Marvin stated that ‘you cannot trust’ an addict and that she could ‘almost guarantee’ that Misti would receive another call ‘ask[ing] for more’ if Misti sent Mya the ransom. Marvin directed Misti not to ‘enable [Mya]’ by ‘sending her money.’ Mya alleges that Marvin’s statements and instruction caused Misti to doubt the legitimacy of Mya’s kidnapping, and to not pay the ransom, which angered the kidnappers and increased Mya’s danger.”
They continued:
“At the pleading stage, these allegations were sufficient to plausibly state that Marvin created a special relationship between herself and Mya by increasing Mya’s danger. Thus, we reverse the dismissal of Mya’s state-law claim against Marvin and the related vicarious-liability claim against the City.”
A footnote advises that “Defendants only argue for affirmance based on a lack of duty.”
Civil Rights Claim
The panel agreed with Robinson that Hendrix’s federal claims fail. The plaintiff would have a civil-rights claim under 42 U.S.C. §1983 based on deprivation of a federal constitutional right “by a person acting under color of state law” based on the state-created danger doctrine if Marvin had been aware of the peril she was creating and acted with “deliberate indifference” to it.
However, the judges said, such awareness had not been pled. They wrote:
“[I]it was foreseeable that Marvin might be wrong that the kidnapping was a scam, that instructing Misti not to pay the ransom would influence Misti’s behavior, and that, as a result, Mya’s danger would increase. Mya’s allegations fail, however, to demonstrate that Marvin subjectively recognized that risk.”
The opinion elaborates:
“Mya alleged that Marvin believed that the kidnapping was a scam and convinced Misti of the same. If Marvin herself was convinced that the situation was a scam, she could not have known that convincing Misti not to pay the ransom would risk exposing Mya to greater danger.”
The case is Hendrix v. City of San Diego, 22-55732.
Attempted Murderer Sentenced
Michael Pedraza is the man who shot Hendrix. He was convicted of the attempted murder of her and, in a separate trial, of the unrelated murder of a man mistakenly thought to be an undercover officer.
On July 31, was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole.
He had two co-conspirators, each of whom earlier pled guilty to murder and attempted murder. Last year, Cesar Alvarado was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole and Britney Canal was given a term of 30 years to life in prison.
Copyright 2024, Metropolitan News Company