Opinion ID: 673674
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Officers Wall, Tevepaugh, and Brown

Text: 38 Officers Wall and Tevepaugh had responded to prior incidents at the Leitzsey home and were aware of Leitzsey's suicidal tendencies. In addition, Officer Brown's approval of the incident report detailing Leitzsey's prior suicide attempt is sufficient to raise a genuine issue of material fact concerning whether Brown had prior knowledge of Leitzsey's suicidal tendencies. However, Plaintiff Leitzsey presented no evidence that these officers were aware that Leitzsey would be, or had been, taken into custody on May 27, 1989. Accordingly, the evidence cannot support a finding that these officers were deliberately indifferent to the risk that Leitzsey might commit suicide during his incarceration. Further, while in some instances a failure to relay information that a detainee is suicidal may amount to deliberate indifference, see Gordon, 971 F.2d at 1095, in the absence of any evidence tending to demonstrate that these officers were aware that Leitzsey would be, or had been, taken into custody, we cannot conclude that their failure to do so constituted deliberate indifference. 39 Finally, Plaintiff Leitzsey argues that these officers should have developed a general list of individuals with suicidal tendencies who might be detained in the future for reference by officers responsible for those incarcerated at the jail. However, Plaintiff Leitzsey cites no legal authority imposing such a duty. In the absence of a clearly established duty for the officers to do so, we conclude that they are entitled to qualified immunity. 7 40