Heriberto Rodriguez v. County of Los Angeles, 891 F.3d 776 (2018)

Citation: Heriberto Rodriguez v. County of Los Angeles, 891 F.3d 776 (2018)
Parent Document: Heriberto Rodriguez v. County of Los Angeles, 891 F.3d 776 (2018)
Jurisdiction: United States (federal)
Effective Date: 2018-05-30
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/4502306/heriberto-rodriguez-v-county-of... ↗

Full Text

1,390 chars

We have recognized that a § 1983 plaintiff may prove the
second type of Monell liability, deliberate indifference,
through evidence of a “failure to investigate and discipline
employees in the face of widespread constitutional
violations.” Hunter v. Cty. of Sacramento, 652 F.3d 1225,
1234 n.8 (9th Cir. 2011). Thus, it is sufficient under our case
law to prove a “custom” of encouraging excessive force to
provide evidence that personnel have been permitted to use
force with impunity. Id. at 1233 (“We have long recognized
that a custom or practice can be inferred from widespread
practices or evidence of repeated constitutional violations for
which the errant municipal officers were not discharged or
reprimanded.” (internal quotation marks and citations
omitted)); Larez, 946 F.2d at 647 (“[T]here was evidence of
a departmental policy or custom of resorting to the use of
excessive force. The jury properly could find such policy or
custom from the failure of Gates to take any remedial steps
after the violations.”); McRorie v. Shimoda, 795 F.2d 780,
784 (9th Cir. 1986) (“McRorie alleges that guards seriously
injured him and twenty-eight other prisoners during the
shakedown and that Sergeant Dunn was acting under orders
of his superiors. If proved, these acts reflect a [policy or
custom].”); see also Velazquez v. City of Long Beach, 793
48                   RODRIGUEZ V. CRUZ

Other Sections in This Document (185)

Full Text