QA Section

Understanding 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 Civil Lawsuits

What Is 42 U.S.C. Section 1983?

42 U.S. Code § 1983 is a statute in the United States Code that provides a means for individuals to sue for civil rights violations. Section 1983 authorizes a court to grant relief when a party’s federally protected rights have been violated by a state or local official who acted under color of state law. The statute states as follows:

“Every person who, under color of any statute…of any State or Territory… subjects or causes to be subjected any citizen of the United States…to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party…”

The statute acts as the means for enforcing federal constitutional rights against the state and local governments and their officials. It also is a means for enforcing rights secured by the laws of the United States. In a 1983 lawsuit, the plaintiff must demonstrate that the challenged governmental actions violate the U.S. Constitution or the intent of federal law.

Who Bears the Burden of Proof in a 1983 Action?

The plaintiff bears the burden of proving 1) he/she was deprived of rights, privileges, or immunities guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution or federal law, and 2) the deprivation or violation of plaintiff’s rights, was by someone or entity acting under color of state law.

What Are Some of The Common Claims Brought Under Section 1983?

The federal courts in New York handle a wide range of federal constitutional and statutory claims under section 1983. Some common types of claims include discrimination in public employment based on race or the exercise of First Amendment rights, discharge or demotion without proper procedures, and deliberate indifference to the medical needs of prisoners.

Many of the 1983 claims in New York involve accusations of police misconduct, such as false arrest or excessive force, which violates the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition against unreasonable seizures. When determining whether a police officer’s use of excessive force during an arrest breaches the Fourth Amendment, the court evaluates whether the officer’s actions were objectively reasonable given the facts and circumstances of the arrest. In this assessment, the court must ignore the officer’s intent or motivation and instead focus on the objective reasonableness of the officer’s actions based on the facts the officer faced at the scene.

What Is Qualified Immunity?

A key defense to a civil rights lawsuit for police misconduct is qualified immunity. Government officials sued under Section 1983 can assert qualified immunity as a defense, which protects them from liability unless they violated clearly established statutory or constitutional rights that a reasonable person would have known.

Can a Municipality Be Held Liable Under Section 1983?

Yes, a municipality can be held liable under Section 1983, subject to specific requirements that must be satisfied. Section 1983 of Title 42 of the U.S. Code allows individuals to sue for civil rights violations committed by government officials acting under color of state law.

What Are the Conditions for Municipal Liability Under Section 1983?

1. Policy or Custom: The plaintiff must prove that the constitutional violation resulted from an official policy or a longstanding custom of the municipality. This means that isolated incidents of unconstitutional conduct by municipal employees are generally insufficient to establish liability. The policy or custom must be so persistent and widespread that it represents the standard operating procedure of the municipality.
2. Decision by Final Policymaker: Liability can also arise if the violation was the result of a decision made by an individual with final policymaking authority. This includes actions taken by officials who have the power to establish policy for the municipality in a particular area.
3. Failure to Train or Supervise: A municipality may be liable for a constitutional violation if it is shown that the municipality’s failure to train or supervise its employees amounted to deliberate indifference to the rights of individuals with whom those employees come into contact.

What Are Some of the Key Municipal Liability Cases?

Monell v. Department of Social Services of the City of New York (1978): The Supreme Court held that municipalities could be liable under Section 1983, but only if the plaintiff could show that the constitutional violation resulted from an official policy or custom.

City of Canton v. Harris (1989): The Court elaborated on the concept of municipal liability, particularly focusing on the “failure to train” theory.

What Other Factors Must Be Considered in a Section 1983 Case?

1. Causation: The plaintiff must establish a direct causal link between the municipal policy or custom and the constitutional violation.
2. No Respondeat Superior: Municipal liability under Section 1983 does not extend to situations where the municipality is being held liable solely based on the employment relationship with the individual who committed the violation. There must be an element of fault attributable to the municipality itself.

By meeting these criteria, a plaintiff can establish that a municipality is liable for civil rights violations under Section 1983.