The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals is reviewing a federal civil rights lawsuit stemming from the death of Benjamin Melendez, a Nebraska man with permanent brain damage who made several frantic 911 calls before his death, believing police officers were stalking him.
The case, *Sonia Melendez v. City of Grand Island*, involves Sonia Melendez, who serves as personal representative of her deceased relative's estate, challenging the actions of Grand Island city officials, Hall County, and individual 911 dispatchers in their response to Benjamin's emergency calls.
According to court documents filed in the Eighth Circuit, Benjamin Melendez made multiple brief 911 calls to Grand Island emergency services, with none lasting more than 90 seconds. During his first call, Benjamin spoke with 911 dispatcher Brandon Kelley, becoming increasingly agitated as he ranted about his belief that police were stalking him. The call culminated with Benjamin shouting a direct threat: "Step up to my home and you're dead."
Despite this explicit threat, dispatcher Kelley informed responding officers only that the caller was male and "extremely irate [and] yelling," but failed to relay Benjamin's specific threat about killing anyone who came to his home. When officers arrived at Benjamin's residence and knocked on the door, no one answered.
The situation escalated when dispatch personnel repeatedly called Benjamin back, which defendants claim was accidental. Benjamin did not answer these return calls but instead called 911 again, reaching Kelley a second time. During this call, Benjamin yelled that "you guys stalked me just now" and provided a false name to the dispatcher.
Benjamin's third and final 911 call connected him with dispatcher Grady Higgins. He remained highly agitated during this conversation, making statements including "I'm going to get on my outside property," though the full context of his remarks during this call was not detailed in the available court filings.
The federal lawsuit names several defendants in both their individual and official capacities, including Jon Rosenlund, Brandon Kelley identified as "911 Dispatcher #1," and Grady Higgins identified as "911 Dispatcher #2." The case also includes unnamed defendants listed as "Does, 1-10" in their individual and official capacities.
The case originated in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska in Lincoln before being appealed to the Eighth Circuit. The appeal was submitted to the three-judge panel on Dec. 18, 2025, and a decision was filed Feb. 10, 2026. The panel consists of Circuit Judges Loken, Smith, and Kobes, with Judge Kobes writing the opinion.
While the specific claims and legal theories underlying the lawsuit are not fully detailed in the available excerpts, the case appears to involve allegations related to the emergency response protocols and potential civil rights violations in the treatment of a disabled individual during a mental health crisis.
The case raises important questions about the obligations of 911 dispatchers and law enforcement agencies when responding to emergency calls from individuals with mental disabilities or brain injuries. Benjamin's permanent brain damage appears to be a central factor in understanding both his behavior during the emergency calls and the potential legal obligations of the responding agencies.
The involvement of multiple government entities and individual officials suggests the lawsuit may involve claims under federal civil rights statutes, potentially including Section 1983 claims for violations of constitutional rights under color of state law. Such cases often examine whether government officials provided appropriate accommodations and responses when dealing with disabled individuals in crisis situations.
The failure to communicate Benjamin's specific threat to responding officers could be particularly significant, as it may have affected how law enforcement approached the situation and whether they were adequately prepared for a potentially dangerous encounter.
The case also highlights ongoing national discussions about emergency response protocols for individuals experiencing mental health crises, particularly those with cognitive disabilities or brain injuries who may not communicate clearly during high-stress situations.
The timing of the case, with oral arguments in late 2025 and a decision in early 2026, places it within current legal developments regarding disability rights and emergency response obligations.
The outcome of this Eighth Circuit appeal could have implications for how 911 dispatch centers and law enforcement agencies throughout the circuit handle emergency calls from individuals with cognitive disabilities, potentially affecting training protocols and response procedures for similar situations in the future.