680 F. App'x 831
11th Cir.2017Background
- Kevin Buckler and Veronica Ekanem brought state-law assault/battery and 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims against individual Broward Sheriff’s Office (BSO) deputies for alleged excessive-force incidents in 2010 and 2011; both plaintiffs were acquitted or otherwise injured as alleged.
- Plaintiffs also sued Sheriff Scott Israel in his official capacity for negligent hiring/supervision/retention (Count VI) and municipal liability under § 1983 (Count VII), alleging a BSO custom of failing to document, investigate, or discipline excessive-force incidents.
- Plaintiffs relied on a large compilation of use-of-force reports, several prior lawsuits and settlements, news accounts, and an expert report by Kenneth Harms asserting systemic deficiencies at BSO.
- Sheriff Israel submitted evidence of BSO written policies, CALEA accreditations, and instances where disciplinary action was taken when misconduct was sustained.
- The district court granted summary judgment for Sheriff Israel on Counts VI and VII; plaintiffs appealed and the Eleventh Circuit affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Negligent hiring/supervision (state law) | Deputies acted negligently and Sheriff failed to supervise/hire properly | Employer liability appropriate only if deputies acted outside scope of employment; here alleged within scope | Affirmed: claim fails because plaintiffs pled deputies acted within scope, so respondeat superior is sole route, not negligent hiring/supervision |
| Municipal liability under § 1983 (deliberate indifference) | BSO had a custom of deliberate indifference to excessive force and inadequate investigations that caused plaintiffs' injuries | BSO had policies, accreditation, and evidence of discipline; plaintiffs produced only generalized files and expert conclusions insufficient to prove pattern | Affirmed: no genuine issue of material fact that a widespread custom or deliberate indifference existed to support § 1983 municipal liability |
| Sufficiency of plaintiffs’ evidence / expert report | Harms’ report and compilation of reports show systemic failures and inadequate investigations/documentation | Expert opinion was conclusory, cited generally to voluminous reports without tying specific facts to conclusions | Affirmed: expert’s generalized conclusions cannot defeat summary judgment absent specific record support |
| Use of prior lawsuits/settlements as notice | Prior suits and settlements demonstrate BSO should have known of pattern | Most cited suits were settled or dismissed; only two jury verdicts (late 1980s) and not shown factually similar | Affirmed: prior cases and settlements did not create genuine issue of notice or pattern sufficient for deliberate indifference |
Key Cases Cited
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (summary judgment standard)
- Connick v. Thompson, 563 U.S. 51 (municipal liability and deliberate indifference standard)
- Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (reasonableness of force standard)
- Troupe v. Sarasota Cty., Fla., 419 F.3d 1160 (causal connection requirement for § 1983)
- McElligott v. Foley, 182 F.3d 1248 (deliberate indifference components)
- Mercado v. City of Orlando, 407 F.3d 1152 (need for substantially similar prior incidents to show pattern)
- Brooks v. Cty. Comm’n of Jefferson Cty., Ala., 446 F.3d 1160 (nonmoving party must present more than a scintilla to survive summary judgment)