Winzer v. Kaufman County, No. 23-10383 (5th Cir. 2024)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 23-10383 Document: 72-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/28/2024 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit ____________ FILED March 28, 2024 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk No. 23-10383 ____________ Eunice J. Winzer, Individually and on behalf of the statutory beneficiaries of Gabriel A. Winzer; Sohelia Winzer, Plaintiffs—Appellants, versus Kaufman County, Defendant—Appellee. ______________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:15-CV-1284 ______________________________ Before Elrod, Oldham, and Wilson, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam: * This is a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Kaufman County sheriff’s deputies shot and killed Gabriel Winzer. Appellants brought a Fourth Amendment excessive force claim against the deputies and the County. The district court found that no constitutional violation occurred, so it ruled for the defendants on all claims. A panel of this court affirmed the district court’s disposition _____________________ * This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5. Case: 23-10383 Document: 72-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/28/2024 No. 23-10383 with respect to the deputy defendants. Winzer v. Kaufman Cnty., 916 F.3d 464 (5th Cir. 2019) (per curiam). But it found a factual dispute as to whether one deputy committed a constitutional violation, so it reversed the district court’s grant of summary judgment to the County as premature. Id. After further proceedings on remand, the County once more moved for summary judgment, arguing plaintiffs failed as a matter of law to establish the prerequisites for municipal liability under Monell v. Dep’t of Soc. Servs. of City of New York, 436 U.S. 658 (1978). The district court granted the motion, and plaintiffs timely appealed. We have carefully considered the appeal in light of the briefs, oral argument, opinion of the district court, and pertinent portions of the record. Having done so, we find no reversible error of fact or law. AFFIRMED. 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.