Search Articles
SAN DIEGO (CN) — San Diego County must face claims medical staff at the San Diego Central Jail repeatedly denied an 82-year-old man proper medical care while he was in custody, a federal judge ruled Wednesday.
The adult children of the man, who died in the jail, sued the County of San Diego, several jail medical staff members and the correctional healthcare company NaphCare in December in response to the death of their father.
Karim Talib was arrested in August 2024 after a physical assault incident at his senior care facility and was held at the San Diego County Jail during his criminal case. He suffered from a myriad of health conditions, including dementia, hypertension and incontinence, and he required a wheelchair for mobility, his children say in the suit.
Talib was deemed incompetent to stand trial and was recommended to be sent to a mental health facility where he could get assistance with daily activities. He was initially placed in a medical observation unit of the San Diego County Jail for two months, receiving 24-hour care, until he was discharged and placed into a unit with minimal monitoring, where he was unable to care for himself and decompensated, ultimately passing away 10 days later.
The plaintiffs assert nine claims: deliberate indifference to a substantial risk of harm to health, failure to train, unconstitutional custom and practice, ratification, elder abuse, negligence, failure to summon medical care, and violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Rehabilitation Act and the state’s civil rights law.
In Tuesday’s ruling, Senior U.S. District Judge Anthony Battaglia advanced deliberate indifference claims against three individual medical staff members — Kieko Fukue, Theresa Palafox and Edgar Timpug — who, the plaintiffs say, failed to provide medical care that a reasonable healthcare provider would have under the circumstances.
“Plaintiffs have alleged that the failures of Palafox, Fukue, and Timpug to take any action that a reasonable official in their positions would — such as taking decedent’s vitals, assessing his status, providing prompt medical attention, referring him to a higher level of care, or closely monitoring him — caused decedent’s death. This is adequate at the pleading stage,” Battaglia wrote in the 35-page order.
However, the Barack Obama appointee tossed deliberate indifference claims against three other individual medical staff members, saying the plaintiffs did not state any specific claims tying them to the care of their father.
The judge similarly allowed state civil rights claims against Palafox, Fukue, and Timpug to move forward, while dismissing the claims against the three other staff members.
Battaglia further found the plaintiffs had sufficiently claimed discriminatory intent under the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, writing the county defendants’ “inaction concerning decedent’s obvious need for accommodation rises to the level of deliberateness.”
He also allowed to proceed claims of negligence and failure to summon medical care under California law based on the plaintiffs’ assertions that Timpug, a licensed vocational nurse at the jail, knew Talib was “in need of immediate medical care” but failed to take action to get such medical care.
“Taking plaintiffs’ allegations as true, as required at this stage, the complaint alleges sufficient facts to infer that the county employees failed to take reasonable action to summon the necessary medical care for decedent and, thus, the county may be held vicariously liable,” Battaglia wrote.
However, the judge dismissed claims of failure to train, unconstitutional custom and practice, and ratification against the jail’s medical staff, saying the plaintiffs did not identify any training policy that rose to the level of deliberate indifference, nor did they provide evidence the facility’s supposed policies of acting deliberately indifferent to the serious medical needs of inmates were “widespread and persistent” or correctional employees knew about them.
Battaglia further dismissed the plaintiffs’ dependent adult theory of their elder abuse claim, as Talib was 82 years old and would not qualify as a dependent adult, but rather as an elder, and advanced the claim in all other respects.
The judge dismissed NaphCare from the lawsuit entirely, saying the plaintiffs failed to sufficiently link the company to Talib.
The plaintiffs have until July 8 to file an amended complaint.
In a statement to Courthouse News, attorney Adrienne Scott with Blackstone Trial Group, representing Naphcare, said they were “grateful for the court’s careful consideration of the legal issues.”
“We’re honored to represent NaphCare and their professional team who provide healthcare in the challenging corrections environment and we’ll continue defending them vigorously," she said.
Representatives for the other parties did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Follow @mhattridge_Subscribe to our free newsletters
Our weekly newsletter Closing Arguments offers the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world, while the monthly Under the Lights dishes the legal dirt from Hollywood, sports, Big Tech and the arts.
