Two adverse parties involved in the federal lawsuit filed on behalf of the estate of a Blair County corrections officer killed in the line of duty more than four years ago are opposing recommendations by a federal magistrate judge.

The lawsuit initially was filed in 2022 following the death of Corrections Officer Rhonda Russell, 47, who was taken hostage on Nov. 17, 2021, while guarding inmates awaiting preliminary hearings at Blair Central Court in Altoona.

Inmate Christopher J. Aikens, 58, was able to acquire Russell’s gun and used her as a human shield when Altoona Police officer George Bistline, serving as a court liaison officer that day, approached the Central Court cellblock.

Aikens ordered Bistline to “back away.”

He did so, but then pulled his gun and re-approached the cellblock, where he fired a round in an attempt to save both himself and Russell, according to court documents.

Russell was hit by the shot and died.

Her estate filed the lawsuit in the U.S. District Court in Johnstown, seeking damages.

It charged that Russell and another corrections officer were ordered that morning to transport eight inmates to Central Court, but the officers were not informed by prison officials that Aikens was a risk, having made at least three attempts to escape in the days after he was committed to the prison on new criminal charges.

Prison officials who knew about the Aikens’s escape attempts were lax in not alerting Russell and her fellow officer of the inmate’s apparent intent on fleeing, the lawsuit charged.

The lawsuit includes as a defendant a deputy sheriff who left Russell alone to guard several inmates.

The named defendants also included Sergeant Bistline and his employer, the City of Altoona.

All claims against county and city officials were dismissed in 2024 by District Judge Kim R. Gibson, but he permitted the attorney for the Russell estate, Robert A. Bracken of Pittsburgh, to file an amended complaint.

Meanwhile, Sergeant Bistline died in 2022, and Gibson passed away in April 2025.

Magistrate Judge Maureen P. Kelly, who presides in Pittsburgh, was assigned the case, and, in a recent opinion, she upheld Gibson’s ruling dismissing civil rights charges and other alleged offenses against county prison personnel and the sheriff’s deputy, but she raised questions about Gibson’s dismissal of civil rights charges against the City of Altoona and Bistline’s attempted use of deadly force to allegedly save Russell’s life.

Gibson had noted that the actions taken by the Altoona officer “shocks the conscience” of the court, but Gibson ruled that the officer was protected from lawsuit by qualified immunity.

However, as Kelly pointed out in her recent opinion, the amended complaint contends that Ailkens had dropped his weapon before he was shot.

Kelly has ordered the attorneys involved in the lawsuit to, within 90 days, review the incident to determine in greater detail whether Aikens was or was not armed when the shooting occurred.

At this point, she does not recommend dismissal of civil charges against Altoona.

The magistrate judge gave all sides time to challenge her recommendations.

Bracken, on behalf of Russell estate, has contested the recommendations by Kelly to dismiss the complaint against the prison officials and sheriff’s deputy.

He points out Blair County has a history of not properly training employees or ignoring possible danger to its employees.

The attorney for the Russell estate recalled an incident in which an inmate planned to take Russell hostage using a “ball gag, makeshift handcuffs and a map” to carry out his plan of escape.

“Blair County has a history of employee mishandling of these situations, in addition to several instances of employee misconduct related to Aikens,” the attorney claimed as he objected to Kelly’s recommendations to dismiss the bulk of his complaint.

The city and the estate of Bistline, represented by attorneys Bernard P. Matthews and Charles J. Dangelo of Pittsburgh, also challenged Kelly’s decision not to grant immunity to the officer.

“Ms. Russell is dead due to the callous actions of Aikens,” they stated in their 24-page brief.

The defense attorneys noted Aikens is the only remaining eyewitness who alleges he was lowering or dropping the gun when Bistline fired the fatal shot that struck Russell.

Bistline’s estate, the defense stated, “is entitled to qualified immunity, even if a jury decides his decision to fire his weapon was reckless or conscience-shocking under the Fourteenth Amendment.

“Sergeant Bistline,” it continued, “did not have fair warning that his split second or hurried decision to fire his weapon could be regarded as reckless and subject him to constitutional liability under the Fourteenth Amendment,” the defense attorneys argued.

The defense stated additional discovery is not needed in order to grant immunity to Bistline’s estate.

The Third Circuit Court of Appeals has held that a police officer’s use of deadly force is justified under the Fourteenth Amendment if the officer has reason to believe a suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious bodily injury to the officer or others or to prevent a suspect’s escape or injury to others, the defense contended.

Kelly will review the objections filed on behalf of the defendants and will present the recommendations to U.S. District Judge Stephanie L. Haines in Johnstown to determine if the lawsuit, or parts of the lawsuit, can move forward.