In 2018, law enforcement officers arrested John Griswold after a domestic disturbance. He admitted to taking several pills that were later identified as ulcer medication. After being medically cleared by doctors and discharged from the hospital, the officers placed Griswold in a jail cell. He died several hours later. Griswold’s estate sued several jail officials alleging deliberate indifference in violation of his constitutional rights. The district court denied qualified immunity to some of the officials; they appealed.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit stated in its May 11, 2026 Opinion that qualified immunity attaches when an official’s conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known. A qualified immunity analysis asks (1) whether, considering the allegations in a light most favorable to the party injured, a constitutional right has been violated, and (2) whether that right was clearly
established.
To establish the objective component of a deliberate-indifference claim involving a medical condition, the medical condition must be serious. In the case the federal appellate court was deciding, the doctors medically cleared Griswold for incarceration. So, to satisfy the objective prong, Griswold must show that it was clearly established at the time of the incident that the seriousness of his condition was so obvious that even a lay person would easily recognize the necessity for a doctor’s attention.
During intake, Griswold needed assistance walking and refused to answer questions. He appeared lethargic. Once in the cell, he vomited one time, with some of the vomit landing on himself and the rest on the floor. Griswold briefly cleaned his face and mouth but did not ask for assistance and remained sitting in his vomit for nearly 13 hours. Beyond that, however, Griswold exhibited no signs of distress. He largely remained in the same position, mostly seated against the wall, though he adjusted into a semi-lying position in the morning hours. Throughout the night and morning, defendants conducted numerous cell checks. Throughout the evening and morning, Griswold can be seen either moving his arms, legs, or head, occasionally readjusting his legs, folding or unfolding his arms, touching his face with his hands, or fixing his shirt.
“[H]ere, Griswold was not lying prone and unconscious in his vomit. And besides the single instance of vomiting, Griswold displayed no outward signs of distress and continually made minor movements throughout the duration of his stay in the cell that would suggest to jail officials that he was in no immediate need of medical attention. Accordingly, Griswold’s need for medical attention was not “obvious.””
The federal appellate court held: “Griswold’s death was tragic, made even more so by the fact that Griswold sat in his own vomit for hours. But it was not clearly established that the circumstances leading to his death satisfied the objective prong of the Farmer test. The jail officials therefore are entitled to qualified immunity.”
Source Griswold v. Trinity Health Michigan, et al., No. 25-1271.
If you or a loved one were injured due to the lack of appropriate medical care in jail in the United States, you should promptly seek the legal advice of a local medical malpractice lawyer in your state who handles jail medical malpractice claims and may investigate your claim and represent you or your loved one, if appropriate.
Visit our website or call us toll-free in the United States at 800-295-3959 to be connected with jail medical malpractice lawyers in your state who may assist you.
Turn to us when you don’t know where to turn.
