From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Balt. City Police Dep't v. Owens

Supreme Court of the United States
Apr 27, 2015
575 U.S. 983 (2015)
Download
PDF
Check
Treatment

Summary

reversing dismissal of complaint asserting police liability for constitutional violation arising from police department's custom when department failed to take action to correct pattern of officer misconduct, and noting police department's notice and indifference could be inferred from sufficiently pervasive pattern of misconduct

Summary of this case from London v. Beaty
See 4 Summaries

Opinion

No. 14–887.

04-27-2015

BALTIMORE CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT, et al., petitioners, v. James OWENS.

Opinion

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.

Summaries of

Balt. City Police Dep't v. Owens

Supreme Court of the United States
Apr 27, 2015
575 U.S. 983 (2015)

reversing dismissal of complaint asserting police liability for constitutional violation arising from police department's custom when department failed to take action to correct pattern of officer misconduct, and noting police department's notice and indifference could be inferred from sufficiently pervasive pattern of misconduct

Summary of this case from London v. Beaty

In Owens, 767 F.3d at 402, the Fourth Circuit reiterated that to establish a Monell claim based on custom and practice, the plaintiff “must point to a ‘persistent and widespread practice[] of municipal officials,' the ‘duration and frequency' of which indicate that policymakers (1) had actual or constructive knowledge of the conduct, and (2) failed to correct it due to their ‘deliberate indifference.'” (quoting Spell, 824 F.2d at 1386-91) (alteration in Owens).

Summary of this case from Open Justice Balt. v. Balt. City Law Dep't

In Owens, 767 F.3d at 395, the Fourth Circuit reiterated: "Qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for ‘civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’ "

Summary of this case from Sammons v. McCarty

In Owens, 767 F.3d at 402, the Fourth Circuit reiterated that, to establish a Monell claim, the plaintiff "must point to a ‘persistent and widespread practice[ ] of municipal officials,’ the ‘duration and frequency’ of which indicate that policymakers (1) had actual or constructive knowledge of the conduct, and (2) failed to correct it due to their ‘deliberate indifference.’ "

Summary of this case from Saltz v. City of Frederick
Case details for

Balt. City Police Dep't v. Owens

Case Details

Full title:BALTIMORE CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT, et al., petitioners, v. James OWENS.

Court:Supreme Court of the United States

Date published: Apr 27, 2015

Citations

575 U.S. 983 (2015)
575 U.S. 983
191 L. Ed. 2d 762
83 U.S.L.W. 3650

Citing Cases

Malone v. Dep't of Pub. Safety & Corr. Servs.

III. Discussion Section 1983 of Title 42 of the United States Code provides that a plaintiff may file suit…

Hyde v. Md. State Bd. of Dental Exam'rs

Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff may file suit against any person who, acting under color of state…

124 Citing Cases