Cullingford v. City Of Houston
4:11-cv-00523
S.D. Tex.Mar 20, 2012Background
- Cullingford alleges police misconduct by Houston officers, including Morales, starting with an August 5, 2009 incident at her home.
- She was arrested, her home and purse were searched without permission, and she was jailed for about 15 hours.
- She contends jailers used force, threatened Tasering, and caused pain and injuries during booking and intake.
- Charges against her for assault by threat were later dismissed; she contends there was no probable cause.
- Defendants move to dismiss state-law claims for lack of timely notice under the Texas Tort Claims Act and Houston Charter.
- Court grants motion to dismiss state-law claims with prejudice and dismisses City’s §1983 claims for lack of a plausible policy or custom.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether failure to give statutory notice defeats state-law claims | Cullingford argues actual notice suffices to waive immunity. | City says written notice within 90 days (and 6 months under Act) required. | Notice requirements not satisfied; state claims dismissed with prejudice. |
| Whether the City can be liable under §1983 for a policy or custom | Cullingford asserts a pervasive custom of misconduct supports liability. | City contends no adequate pleading of a policy or widespread custom, or its causation. | No plausible policy or custom shown; §1983 claims against City dismissed. |
| Whether alleged non-disclosure of video/autopsy evidence is legally relevant | Cullingford cites non-disclosure as part of alleged custom. | Non-disclosure elements are unrelated to her claims and should be struck. | Claims and evidence of non-disclosure struck as irrelevant to the asserted custom. |
| Whether inadequate training constitutes §1983 liability | Cullingford asserts lack of training supports liability. | Plaintiff must show deliberate indifference and direct causation; she fails. | Inadequate training not plausibly alleged; City’s liability not shown. |
Key Cases Cited
- Connick v. Thompson, 131 S. Ct. 1350 (2011) (municipal liability requires policy or custom; not vicarious liability)
- Monell v. Dep’t of Social Servs., 436 U.S. 658 (1978) (municipal liability for official policy or custom)
- Pembaur v. City of Cincinnati, 475 U.S. 469 (1986) (policy or custom can be established by officials with final authority)
- Bennett v. City of Slidell, 735 F.2d 861 (5th Cir. 1984) (rigorous standards for municipal liability; not for isolated incidents)
- World Wide Street Preachers Fellowship v. Town of Columbia, 591 F.3d 747 (5th Cir. 2009) (inadequacy of training requires three-part showing)
