The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
sovereign immunity litigators: suing Uvalde police possible here?
Poast new message in this thread
Date: May 26th, 2022 3:32 PM Author: Comical National (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5117557&forum_id=2#44578715) |
 |
Date: May 26th, 2022 3:36 PM Author: bossy immigrant You’ll get in everywhere you apply! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5117557&forum_id=2#44578737) |
Date: May 26th, 2022 3:38 PM Author: emerald painfully honest meetinghouse sound barrier Need a Texas lawyer to answer about state law claims, but I'm doubtful since I've heard Texas has a very stingy tort claims act.
As far as federal law, there's no constitutional claim for failing to protect someone from harm by a private citizen. See Deshaney doctrine. So there's no liability in the first place and sovereign immunity doesn't come into the picture. That aside, actual sovereign immunity only applies to states (not municipalities) under federal law, through the Eleventh Amendment, but it's hard to recover against municipalities since they aren't vicariously liable for actions by their officers and you have to show a municipal "policy or custom" caused the harm.
So I'm doubtful they would ever see a cent from the police. |
|
Date: May 26th, 2022 3:40 PM Author: Henna yarmulke stage A federal claim would have to be based on state-created danger and against a municipality it would have to be under Monell (essentially a failure to train). I defended cops once in a suit based on husband shooting and killing wife. The wife's mother (on behalf of the estate) sued under theory that the cops returned guns to husband that had been confiscated during a domestic. So they gave him the ability to kill and he did. Stupid mom lost, but it was a nice try. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5117557&forum_id=2#44578759) |
|
Date: May 26th, 2022 3:42 PM Author: emerald painfully honest meetinghouse sound barrier Yes, but there's clearly no state-created danger here, just a failure to act. And Monell is simply the name of the case which contains the "policy or custom" law I stated above.
So we're basically saying the same thing with different words. |
|
Date: May 26th, 2022 3:43 PM Author: Henna yarmulke stage See my edit to give an example of what I'm talking about. A plaintiff would have to prove the state took actions that made matters worse and enabled the shooter to kill. Otherwise, yes, I agree with you. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5117557&forum_id=2#44578781) |
|
Date: May 26th, 2022 3:44 PM Author: emerald painfully honest meetinghouse sound barrier Also, "failure to train" claims are extremely difficult to win under Supreme Court precedent, e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Connick_v._Thompson (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5117557&forum_id=2#44578784) |
|
Date: May 26th, 2022 3:44 PM Author: Henna yarmulke stage Agreed. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5117557&forum_id=2#44578790) |
|
Date: May 26th, 2022 4:28 PM Author: fragrant bawdyhouse I heard like 70% of staTTTe court judge$ in TTTexas only have a GED. the real question is whether they support the parents and let you go to a jury or are back the blue turds. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5117557&forum_id=2#44579043) |
|
Date: May 26th, 2022 3:51 PM Author: sick ticket booth personal credit line I'm no litmo, but I wonder if a clever plaintiff's lawyer could make hay out of analogizing to failure to render aid. The parents were there and were eager to "render aid" themselves, but the police turned them away and then simply failed to do anything. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5117557&forum_id=2#44578842) |
|
Date: May 26th, 2022 3:52 PM Author: Comical National Kind of mentioned above. They arguably took steps to make the situation more dangerous. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5117557&forum_id=2#44578849) |
|
Date: May 26th, 2022 4:32 PM Author: Supple red marketing idea dilemma Difficult argument. Could be pled as §1983 against individual local officers who detained parents without reasonable articulable suspicion or probable cause, but the courts are likely to invoke "exigency" to absolve the officers. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5117557&forum_id=2#44579066) |
|
Date: May 26th, 2022 3:52 PM Author: motley onyx temple elastic band no. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5117557&forum_id=2#44578847) |
|
Date: May 26th, 2022 3:55 PM Author: Odious Legal Warrant Orchestra Pit Those cops violated those children's civil rights (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5117557&forum_id=2#44578873) |
|
Date: May 26th, 2022 3:56 PM Author: Comical National you can sue govt agencies under various tort theories without claiming constitutional rights in many jurisdictions see, eg, the federal tort claims act |
|
Date: May 26th, 2022 4:18 PM Author: emerald painfully honest meetinghouse sound barrier The FTCA only applies to federal, not state or local, agencies. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5117557&forum_id=2#44578968) |
|
Date: May 26th, 2022 4:26 PM Author: Comical National sure, but i assume states have some analogous laws (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5117557&forum_id=2#44579023) |
|
Date: May 26th, 2022 4:36 PM Author: Henna yarmulke stage Yes, they have sovereign and local government immunity laws that waive immunity in only a few narrowly tailored situations involving negligence (e.g., failure to maintain a roadway). Police protection is never one of those situations. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5117557&forum_id=2#44579092) |