holding that, if an individual police officer did not inflict a constitutional injury on plaintiff, then it is inconceivable that a city and its police commissioner could be liable to respondent because, “[i]f a person has suffered no constitutional injury at the hands of the individual police officer, the fact that the departmental regulations might have authorized the use of constitutionally excessive force is quite beside the point.”
How later courts described this case
- holding that, if an individual police officer did not inflict a constitutional injury on plaintiff, then it is inconceivable that a city and its police commissioner could be liable to respondent because, “[i]f a person has suffered no constitutional injury at the hands of the individual police officer, the fact that the departmental regulations might have authorized the use of constitutionally excessive force is quite beside the point.”
- holding that no damages may be awarded against a municipal corporation when a jury has concluded that the officer inflicted no constitutional harm. “If a person has suffered no constitutional injury at the hands of the individual police officer, the fact that the departmental regulations might have authorized the use of constitutionally excessive force is quite beside the point.”
- holding that neither Monell v. New York City Dept. of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658, 98 S.Ct. 2018, 56 L.Ed.2d 611 (1978), nor any other case authorizes the award of damages against a municipal corporation based on the actions of one of its officers when in the officer inflicted no constitutional harm
- holding that the municipal defendants “were sued only because they were thought legally responsible for [the individual officer’s] actions; if the latter inflicted no constitutional injury on respondent, it is inconceivable that [the municipal defendants] could be liable to respondent.”
Written by the judges who cited it.
Distinguished
Distinguished by International Ground Transportation, Inc. v. Mayor of Ocean City, 475 F.3d 214 (2007)
As other circuits have found, “If the jury based its verdict on the ground that the officers were entitled to qualified immunity, the Heller rule precluding liability is inapplicable.
Distinguished by Curley v. Village of Suffern, 268 F.3d 65 (2001)
Even if Heller were inapplicable, we would affirm on the ground that plaintiff cannot create a triable issue of fact to defeat defendants’ motion for summary judgment by asserting in conclusory fashion that Venturini and Osborn had a duty to intercede but failed to do so.
The opinion
Justice Marshall
dissents from this summary disposition, which has been ordered without affording the parties prior notice or an opportunity to file briefs on the merits. See Cuyahoga Valley R. Co. v. Transportation Union, 474 U. S. 3, 8 (1985) (Marshall, J., dissenting); Maggio v. Fulford, 462 U. S. 111, 120-121 (1983) (Marshall, J., dissenting).