Thomas J. Ingrassia v. Keith Schafer, Director, Missouri Department of Mental Health

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 13-3621
___________________________
Thomas J. Ingrassia
lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee
v.
Keith Schafer, Director, Missouri Department of Mental Health, In His Official
Capacity; Felix Vincenz, Chief Operating Officer, Division of Comprehensive
Psychiatric Services, Missouri Department of Mental Health, In His Official
Capacity; Julie Inman, Regional Executive Officer, Missouri Department of Mental
Health, In Her Official Capacity
lllllllllllllllllllll Defendants
Carol Dicknette, Office of Consumer Safety, Missouri Department of Mental Health
lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant
Leigh Gibson, Office of Consumer Safety, Missouri Department of Mental Health
lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant
Alan Blake, Chief Operating Officer, SORTS, In His Official and Individual
Capacity; Jay Englehart, Psychiatrist/Physician, Medical Director, SORTS, In His
Official and Individual Capacity; Beth Weinkein, Dietician II, SORTS, In Her
Official and Individual Capacity
lllllllllllllllllllll Defendants - Appellants

-- 1 of 3 --

Brenda Swift, Facility Grievance Coordinator, SORTS, In Her Official and
Individual Capacity; Bob Wills, Chief Nursing Executive, SORTS; Joe Easter, RN
5, SORTS
lllllllllllllllllllll Defendants
Marybeth Rowe, RN 5, SORTS
lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant
Kevin Fletcher, Risk Management Committee; Kristina Bender, Unit Program
Supervisor, SORTS; John Does, Members of Risk Manaagement Committee,
Executive Committee, Resident's Rights Review Committee, SORTS
lllllllllllllllllllll Defendants
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis
____________
Submitted: August 15, 2014
Filed: August 20, 2014
[Unpublished]
____________
Before BENTON, BEAM, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Thomas J. Ingrassia sued Keith Schafer and other defendants under 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983, alleging violation of his constitutional right to adequate nutrition while
incarcerated. The district court denied defendants qualified immunity. They appeal.
See Robbins v. Becker, 715 F.3d 691, 693 (8th Cir. 2013) (“[This court has]
-2-

-- 2 of 3 --

jurisdiction to hear an interlocutory appeal of the district court’s denial of qualified
immunity under the collateral order doctrine.”).
This court remands the case so that the district court can make findings of fact
and conclusions of law sufficient to permit appellate review of defendants’ qualified
immunity defense. See Wright v. United States, 545 Fed. Appx. 588, 589-90 (8th Cir.
2013) (district court must determine which facts are genuinely disputed and view
those facts favorable to the nonmovant); Jones v. McNeese, 675 F.3d 1158, 1160 (8th
Cir. 2012) (remanding to the district court “for a more complete articulation of its
analysis of [defendant’s] motion for summary judgment based on qualified
immunity”).
* * * * * * *
The district court’s order is vacated, and the case remanded for further
proceedings consistent with this opinion.
______________________________
-3-

-- 3 of 3 --