Opinion

Brown v. Sirchie Acquisition Co.

  • 694 F. App'x 745
Court
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
Filed
Jul 25, 2017
Status
Published
On the bench
Jordan, Rosenbaum, Wilson
Cited by
2 cases
Authority
More cited than 44.8%

The opinion

PER CURIAM:

Sirchie Acquisition Company sells drug-testing kits to the Atlanta Police Department and the Douglasville Police Department. During a traffic stop, Atlanta police used one of the kits to test baking ingredients found in Justin Mallory’s car for drugs. The kit generated positive results, but later, after Mallory spent weeks in jail, forensic lab tests showed that the kit results were wrong. Similarly, the Douglas-ville police used one of the kits to test vitamins found in Kerron Brown’s backpack for drugs, the kit generated positive results, and after Brown spent weeks in jail, forensic lab tests showed that the kit results were wrong.

Following their releases from jail, Mallory and Brown filed a complaint against Sirchie, the City of Atlanta, the City of Douglasville, and the police officers involved in Mallory’s arrest—Michael Wisk-emann and Arthur Fernkorn. Mallory and Brown raised a variety of claims under Georgia state law and 42 U.S.C. § 1983 . They alleged products-liability claims against Sirchie; negligence, vicarious liability, and failure-to-train-and-supervise claims against Atlanta, Wiskemann, and Fernkorn; and § 1983 Monell 1 claims against Atlanta and Douglasville. The district court dismissed all the claims on the pleadings. Mallory and Brown now appeal the dismissal.

Mallory and Brown argue that the district court erred in (1) determining that Wiskemann’s and Fernkorn’s actions, as pleaded, were discretionary in nature, (2) finding that their complaint does not set forth sufficient allegations to support a plausible § 1983 Monell claim, and (3) de *746 nying their motion to amend. 2 After careful consideration of these arguments, we find no reversible error. Therefore, we affirm.

AFFIRMED.

. Monell v. Dep’t of Soc. Servs., 436 U.S. 658 , 98 S.Ct. 2018 , 56 L.Ed.2d 611 (1978).

. Mallory and Brown initially raised additional arguments challenging the dismissal of their claims against Sirchie. But Mallory, Brown, and Sirchie since filed a joint motion requesting dismissal of Mallory and Brown’s appeal as to Sirchie. We GRANT Mallory, Brown, and Sirchie’s joint motion to dismiss.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.