Marrero-Rodriguez v. Municipality of San Juan
2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 9273
1st Cir.2012Background
- Civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983; Iqbal pleading standard applied; district court dismissal upheld for some claims and reversed for others on remand.
- Lozada- Vergara, San Juan sergeant, died after being shot during a live-fire training exercise where a supervisor and subordinates conducted or oversaw the training.
- Training occurred at the San Juan police facility; firearms were involved despite rules requiring dummy guns or no firearms, and safety protocols were not enforced.
- Key participants: Lt. Angel Pacheco-Orta (supervisor) and Officer Julio Santiago-Rodríguez (subordinate); both allegedly involved in or responsible for the lethal training.
- Plaintiffs are Lozada’s widow and two sons; asserted Fourth, Eighth, Fourteenth Amendment, and Puerto Rico law claims; Mayor and Municipality named but liability contested.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Fourteenth Amendment due process claims survive against certain defendants | Lozada’s shooting during training shocks conscience. | Some defendants lacked personal involvement; claims improper. | Fourteenth claims survive as to directly involved and some supervisors; dismissed as to Mayor and Municipality. |
| Whether Fourth and Eighth Amendment claims were properly dismissed | Claims plausibly pled under Fourth/Eighth claims. | Not pled or applicable; elements not present. | Dismissal affirmed for Fourth and Eighth claims. |
| Municipal and mayorial liability under Monell | Municipality liable for deficient training and policies. | Respondeat superior and direct liability unavailable for Mayor/Municipality. | Dismissal of claims against Mayor and Municipality affirmed; insufficient municipal liability pled. |
| Role of supervisors with training responsibility | Supervisors’ direct involvement and training structure plausibly violate due process. | Supervisors may not be liable absent personal misconduct. | Some non-direct defendants plausibly liable; discovery may clarify; others dismissed. |
| Iqbal pleading standard application | Pleadings meet plausibility standard overall. | Some claims not pled with plausibility or properly pled. | Iqbal standards applied; some claims survive, others dismissed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (U.S. 2009) (pleading plausibility standard; more than mere possibility required)
- Air Sunshine, Inc. v. Carl, 663 F.3d 27 (1st Cir. 2011) (clarifies Iqbal standard in First Circuit)
- Maldonado v. Fontanes, 568 F.3d 263 (1st Cir. 2009) (conscience-shocking substantive due process standard)
- Espinoza v. Sabol, 558 F.3d 83 (1st Cir. 2009) (substantive due process analysis context)
- Cummings v. McIntire, 271 F.3d 341 (1st Cir. 2001) (contextual test for actionable due process conduct)
- Chavez v. Martinez, 538 U.S. 760 (U.S. 2003) (limits on extending due process in certain claims)
- City of Revere v. Mass. Gen. Hosp., 463 U.S. 239 (U.S. 1983) (Eighth Amendment/procedural context; not applicable here as charged)
- Bd. of Cnty. Comm'rs v. Brown, 520 U.S. 397 (U.S. 1997) (municipal liability; failure to show Monell policy/s terkait)
- Monell v. Dep't of Soc. Servs., 436 U.S. 658 (U.S. 1978) (establishes municipal liability standards)
- Young v. City of Providence ex rel. Napolitano, 404 F.3d 4 (1st Cir. 2005) (defining scope of municipal training liability)