The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed Tuesday the dismissal of constitutional claims filed by Brittney Kennedy against the City of Arlington, Texas and 15 police officers following the death of her husband during a police training exercise.
Brittney Kennedy, acting individually and as surviving spouse on behalf of minor M.S.K. and as anticipated personal representative of Marquis Kennedy's estate, had appealed the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas's dismissal of her constitutional claims in *Kennedy v. City of Arlington, Texas* (5th Cir. 2026).
The case stems from a 2022 incident in which Marquis Kennedy suffered cardiac arrest during a self-defense simulation conducted as part of police-cadet training. Kennedy brought claims against the City of Arlington and 15 individual officers, including Shelly Bateman, Jonathan P. Bucek, Richard Coleman, Tyler Ferrell, Patrick Knight, David Kurbinsky, Michael Leonesio, Leonard Ray, Ronnie McCoy, Bobby Mugueza, Officer Norwood, Connor Shanahan, Sean Wheatley, Jastin D. Williams, and Bradley McNulty.
The three-judge panel, consisting of Circuit Judges Haynes, Duncan, and Ramirez, issued a unanimous opinion written by Circuit Judge Stuart Kyle Duncan. The court examined whether the training exercise constituted a constitutional seizure and whether the officers owed Kennedy a constitutional duty of medical care.
Kennedy argued that the district court erred in its analysis of both issues. She contended that the self-defense simulation involved a constitutional seizure that triggered Fourth Amendment protections, and that the officers had a constitutional duty to provide medical care to her husband during the training exercise.
The Fifth Circuit disagreed with Kennedy's constitutional arguments. Circuit Judge Duncan wrote that the court "cannot find any plausible allegation that the defendants violated the Constitution." The opinion indicates that the appeals court found no constitutional seizure occurred during the training exercise and that no constitutional duty of medical care existed under the circumstances.
The case raises questions about the application of constitutional protections in the context of police training exercises. Traditional Fourth Amendment seizure analysis typically involves interactions between police officers and members of the public during law enforcement activities. The Kennedy case presented the novel question of whether similar protections apply when a civilian participates in police training activities.
The constitutional duty of medical care issue similarly involves complex legal questions about when government actors have affirmative obligations to provide assistance. Courts have generally been reluctant to find broad constitutional duties to provide aid, with such obligations typically arising only in specific circumstances such as when the state has created or increased a danger.
While acknowledging the tragic nature of Kennedy's death, the Fifth Circuit emphasized that not every government action that results in harm necessarily violates the Constitution. Circuit Judge Duncan noted that "Marquis's death is a tragedy, above all for his surviving wife and child," but concluded that tragedy alone does not establish constitutional violations.
The case was originally filed in 2024 as case number 4:24-CV-208 in the Northern District of Texas. The district court's dismissal of the constitutional claims prompted Kennedy's appeal to the Fifth Circuit, which was assigned case number 25-10259.
The Fifth Circuit's affirmance means that Kennedy's constitutional claims against the City of Arlington and the individual officers have been definitively rejected. The ruling establishes precedent within the Fifth Circuit regarding the application of constitutional protections to police training exercises involving civilian participants.
The decision may have broader implications for similar cases involving injuries or deaths during police training activities. Law enforcement agencies routinely conduct training exercises that may involve civilian participants, and the Fifth Circuit's analysis provides guidance on the constitutional framework that applies to such activities.
Kennedy's legal options following the Fifth Circuit's decision are limited. She could potentially seek review from the Supreme Court, though the high court accepts only a small percentage of cases for review. Any petition for certiorari would need to demonstrate that the case presents issues of national importance or conflicts between federal circuits.
The case highlights the challenges faced by families seeking legal recourse following deaths during police training activities. While such incidents may give rise to potential state law claims such as negligence or wrongful death, the Fifth Circuit's decision clarifies that federal constitutional protections may not apply in these contexts.
The City of Arlington and the named officers successfully defended against the constitutional claims, with the Fifth Circuit finding no basis for federal civil rights liability under the circumstances presented. The decision reinforces the limitations on federal constitutional claims against government actors absent clear violations of established constitutional rights.