Civil Rights Lawyers has represented injured individuals in Federal Court with their injury cases. We have argue for our clients using facts driving responses to Defendants’ arguments, and it has worked.
Counties may not be held liable under § 1983 solely because it employs tort-feasor, and instead, Plaintiff must identify municipal “policy” or “custom” that caused Plaintiff’s injury. 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983. Bd. of County Com’rs of Bryan County, Okl. v. Brown, 520 U.S. 397, 117 S. Ct. 1382, 137 L. Ed. 2d 626 (1997). In this case, Plaintiff is asserting that the “Use of Force” policy violates their Fourth Amendments rights because it gives too much discretion to Police Officers, to use excessive force, when there is no distinction between non-violent calls and those with the possibility of violence against the Officers. All an officer has to do is “states that he perceived a threat,” and the Officer is free as a bird. Conversely, Plaintiffs assert that this policy violates Plaintiff due process rights though the 14th Amendment of the Constitution, even though “City” is not the Federal Government.
Acts performed pursuant to “custom” that has not been formally approved by appropriate decision maker may fairly subject municipality to liability under 1983 on theory that relevant practice is so widespread as to have force of law. Id. In this case, “City” has allowed a civilian rider, to avail the “Use of Force” policy, even though he is not a peace officer. This practice places the citizens in danger. This would allow the “use of excessive force” by anyone accompanying a police officer as a rider. Just like it happened to the Plaintiffs.
Municipalities and other local government units are included among those “persons” to whom the Civil Rights Act of 1871 applies; overruling Monroe v. Pape, 365 U.S. 167, 81 S.Ct. 473, 5 L.Ed.2d 492. 42 U.S.C.A. 1983. Monell v. Dep’t of Soc. Services of City of New York, 436 U.S. 658, 98 S. Ct. 2018, 56 L. Ed. 2d 611 (1978). Municipal body sued under the Civil Rights Act of 1871 cannot be entitled to an absolute immunity. Id. Congress did intend municipalities and other local government units to be included among those persons to whom § 1983 applies. Local governing bodies, therefore, can be sued directly under § 1983 for monetary, declaratory, or injunctive relief where, as here, the action that is alleged to be unconstitutional implements or executes a policy statement, ordinance, regulation, or decision officially adopted and promulgated by that body’s officers. Id. In this case, Plaintiffs have asserted claims against “City” not in a “vicarious liability” theory, (which do not exist for 1983 purposes) but rather, as a result of their official policies that where responsible for the deprivation of Plaintiffs’ rights which allowed Plaintiffs to be injured. More specifically, the policy that allows the use of excessive force by deputies and the policy that allows officers to “show” civilian riders their powers and the same policy that allows civilian riders to “use force” against citizens is unconstitutional and should be abolish.
Municipality may not be held liable for its employees’ violations of § 1981 under respondeat superior theory; rather, express “action at law” under 1983 provides the exclusive federal damages remedy for the violation of rights guaranteed by § 1981 when the alleged violation is by a state actor. 42 U.S.C.A. §§ 1981, 1983. Jett v. Dallas Indep. Sch. Dist., 491 U.S. 701, 109 S. Ct. 2702, 105 L. Ed. 2d 598 (1989). In determining whether official’s decisions represent “official policy” of local governmental unit for which unit can be held responsible if policy violates “rights” protected by 1981, trial judge must resolve issue as legal question before case is submitted to jury and must identify those officials or governmental bodies who speak with final policymaking authority for the local governmental actor concerning action alleged to have caused particular constitutional or statutory violation at issue; once such officials have been identified, it is for jury to determine whether their decisions have caused deprivation of rights at issue by policies which affirmatively command that deprivation occur or by acquiescence in longstanding practice or custom which constitutes “standard operating procedure” of local governmental entity. 42 U.S.C.A. § 1981, 1983. Id.
Plaintiffs have asserted that “City” policies described herein and on their pleadings, have caused particular constitutional violations, i.e. equal protection rights, due process rights and the right to be free from excessive force been utilized against the citizens of the United States.
Fighting for your legal rights is here to help you with your legal needs! Give us a call (210) 979-9777 or visit our websites. We care about your legal needs!
Readers that are searching for more info about the niche of suspended ceiling accessories, then visit the link that is mentioned in this paragraph.