Humberto Pellegrino v. Gerald Wengert
703 F. App'x 892
| 11th Cir. | 2017Background
- Pellegrino and Claveria, street artists, were apprehended by three Broward County Sheriff’s Office deputies while trespassing and painting train cars; deputies ordered them to lie face-down and they complied.
- Acevedo’s K-9 allegedly attacked both plaintiffs while they were compliant; plaintiffs say deputies encouraged the dog to "get him" during the attack.
- Plaintiffs sued Sheriff Scott Israel in his official capacity (the Sheriff’s Office) and the deputies under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for excessive force; the district court granted summary judgment to the Sheriff’s Office and entered a Rule 54(b) final judgment.
- Plaintiffs argued the Sheriff’s Office was liable based on (a) deliberate indifference for failing to discipline Deputy Wengert despite prior excessive-force complaints and an open internal investigation, and (b) an unofficial custom tolerating excessive force (including other K-9 complaints, an officer’s demotion, and expert testimony).
- The Sheriff’s Office showed the internal affairs investigations and Professional Standards Committee decisions (exonerated/unfounded/unsustained) were conducted pursuant to written policies; plaintiffs did not dispute investigatory procedures but contended the outcomes were erroneous.
- The Eleventh Circuit assumed the deputies committed a constitutional violation but held plaintiffs failed to raise genuine issues of material fact as to municipal liability (deliberate indifference, custom, or causation).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Sheriff’s Office was deliberately indifferent by not disciplining Wengert before the incident | Wengert had multiple prior complaints and an open investigation; Sheriff’s Office should've disciplined or removed him | Internal investigations and Committee findings followed proper policy; no evidence the Office knew conclusions were wrong | No — plaintiffs failed to show municipal deliberate indifference based on accepted Committee findings |
| Whether there was an official or unofficial custom tolerating excessive force | A pattern of K-9 complaints, Committee non-discipline, an officer’s demotion, and expert opinion show a widespread custom | Investigations on K-9 complaints were conducted per policy and produced non-actionable findings; demotion of Kogan is not proof of a custom to allow force | No — evidence did not show a widespread, persistent custom or improper investigations |
| Causation between any alleged municipal deficiency and the plaintiffs’ injuries | Failure to discipline Wengert caused or contributed to the K-9 attack | Wengert’s role was failure to intervene; Acevedo handled the dog, and no evidence links discipline of Wengert to preventing Acevedo’s conduct | No — plaintiffs produced no evidence that disciplining Wengert would have prevented the attack |
| Whether expert testimony and other record evidence created genuine issues of fact | Expert said discipline was warranted and opined a culture ratified force; plaintiffs also cited list of 37 lawsuits and flyer evidence | Expert relied on second-guessing Committee and unsupported inferences; list of lawsuits (not argued below) is merely names and two judgments, insufficient | No — expert testimony and other materials failed to raise triable issues to overcome summary judgment |
Key Cases Cited
- Chapman v. AI Transp., 229 F.3d 1012 (11th Cir.) (standard of review for summary judgment)
- Haves v. City of Miami, 52 F.3d 918 (11th Cir. 1995) (summary judgment standard)
- Griffin v. City of Opa‑Locka, 261 F.3d 1295 (11th Cir.) (municipal liability requires policy or custom)
- Bd. of Cty. Comm’rs v. Brown, 520 U.S. 397 (U.S. 1997) (custom may be evidenced by widespread practice)
- Connick v. Thompson, 563 U.S. 51 (U.S. 2011) (municipal deliberate indifference requires disregarding known or obvious consequences)
- City of Canton v. Harris, 489 U.S. 378 (U.S. 1989) (causation requirement for municipal liability)
- Johnson v. Breeden, 280 F.3d 1308 (11th Cir.) (excessive-force Fourth Amendment claims are objective)
- Lucas v. W.W. Grainger, Inc., 257 F.3d 1249 (11th Cir.) (affirmance may be supported on any record-grounded basis)
- Busby v. City of Orlando, 931 F.2d 764 (11th Cir.) (official-capacity suit is suit against the municipality)
- Crawford v. Carroll, 529 F.3d 961 (11th Cir.) (view facts in light most favorable to nonmoving party)