Ninth Circuit Reinstates Wheelchair-Bound Washington State Prisoner’s Suit Over Failure to Accommodate Disabilities During Transport
by Matt Clarke
On December 19, 2025, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reinstated a federal civil rights lawsuit brought by a wheelchair-bound Washington State Department of Corrections (DOC) prisoner who was forcibly placed on a standard prison transport bus instead of a special transport for disabled individuals.
According to court documents, DOC prisoner Mussie E. Weldeyohannes “has a documented history of medical accommodations” from the DOC “as the result of his mobility problems,” each of which was documented by a Health Status Report (HSR). At the time of the transfer, he had HSRs for use of a wheelchair, cane, walker and lower tier and lower bunk housing in an ADA-compliant cell. He has a transportation code (T-code) of five. T-codes range from one (can mount stairs of regular transport bus) to five (requires a wheelchair van or other specialized transport vehicle).
Weldeyohannes was transferred between prisons on February 15, 2023. He arrived at the loading area in his wheelchair. He told at least one prison official there that he was unable to board the regular transport bus and required special transportation to accommodate his wheelchair.
The “prison officials treated this as a refusal of transport, called in a crisis negotiator, and after negotiations failed, received authorization from a supervisor to use physical force to move Weldeyohannes onto the normal transport bus.”
The Court record continues, “Weldeyohannes contends he was dropped and dragged onto the floor of the bus” resulting in “an injured shoulder and post-traumatic stress disorder, among other injuries.” An investigation determined that Weldeyohannes had a T-code of five but it had been incorrectly entered as a one in the prison records at the time of the transport.
Weldeyohannes filed a federal action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 with claims for deliberate indifference to substantial risk of serious harm and use of excessive force, as well as claims of violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Rehabilitation Act (RA). The district court granted defendants summary judgment based on a lack of deliberate indifference and qualified immunity. Aided by Public Accountability attorneys Athul K. Acharya and Sara K. Rosenburg of Portland, Oregon, Weldeyohannes appealed.
The Ninth Circuit held that the district court erred in holding that the erroneous T-code entry precluded a finding of deliberate indifference and thus required dismissal of the ADA and RA claims. The ADA and RA require prison officials to reasonably accommodate disabled prisoners, including during transport. See: Bell v. Williams, 108 F.4th 809 (9th Cir. 2024). They are also required to “undertake a fact-specific investigation to determine what constitutes a reasonable accommodation” once a request for accommodation is made. See: Duvall v. County of Kitsap, 260 F.3d 1124 (9th Cir. 2001). The Court held that numerous genuine disputes of the facts surrounding the request for accommodation and investigation preclude granting summary judgment on the ADA and RA claims. See: Updike v. Multnomah County, 870 F.3d 939 (9th Cir. 2017).
“Material disputes of fact similarly preclude summary judgment in favor of the prison officials on Weldeyohannes’s Eighth Amendment claims for deliberate indifference and excessive force,” the Court concluded. “Here, we have sharply conflicting evidence in the record.” Weldeyohannes alleges he was dragged and dropped onto the floor of the bus while defendants claim he went limp and was placed in the bus using de minimus force, and “Only a trier of fact can determine which of these characterizations is closest to the truth.”
The summary dismissal was reversed and the case remanded. See: Weldeyohannes v. State of Washington, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 33187.
As a digital subscriber to Prison Legal News, you can access full text and downloads for this and other premium content.
Already a subscriber? Login
Related legal cases
Weldeyohannes v. State of Washington
| Year | 2025 |
|---|---|
| Cite | 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 33187 |
| Level | Court of Appeals |
Bell v. Williams
| Year | 2024 |
|---|---|
| Cite | 108 F.4th 809 (9th Cir. 2024) |
| Level | Court of Appeals |
Updike v. Multnomah County
| Year | 2017 |
|---|---|
| Cite | 870 F.3d 939 (9th Cir. 2017) |
| Level | Court of Appeals |
Duvall v. County of Kitsap
| Year | 2001 |
|---|---|
| Cite | 260 F.3d 1124 (9th Cir. 2001) |
| Level | Court of Appeals |