Mark Jakob, et al. v. Clara Cheeks

This Court has held, “The Due Process Clause. . . does require the responsible government agency to provide medical care to persons. . . who have been injured while being apprehended by the police.” However, qualified immunity is not to be defined at a “high level of generality,” but “must be ‘particularized’ to the facts of the case.” Here, there is no evidence Decedent, operating a motor vehicle and evading apprehension by law enforcement, survived the impact of his collision with a tree or that any alleged denial of medical care altered the outcome of the collision. The questions presented are:

1. On August 10, 2018, did a fleeing suspect have a clearly established right under the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause to medical care where there is no evidence any medical care could have altered the outcome after initial onset (impact) of the claimed physical injury?

2. As of August 10, 2018, is a plaintiff alleging a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause right to medical attention required to place verifiable medical evidence into the record to establish a detrimental effect of a denial of medical care to make a submissible case?