S.M. v. Michael Krigbaum
2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 21276
| 8th Cir. | 2015Background
- Five female participants in Missouri’s 45th Judicial Circuit Adult Drug Court sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for sexual assaults committed by Scott Edwards, a Lincoln County deputy who served as the Drug Court "tracker." Edwards pleaded guilty to federal deprivation-of-rights charges.
- The Drug Court was established by an MOU and a Policies & Procedures Manual that identified a Tracker role (home visits, inspections, curfew checks, breathalyzer/UA testing) and listed the Tracker as from the Lincoln County Sheriff’s Department. Edwards was a county-paid, part-time tracker; the Sheriff’s Department received partial reimbursement.
- Sheriff Michael Krigbaum (elected 2008, in office 2009) testified he did not read the MOU or manual, did not evaluate Edwards’s tracker performance, and believed Edwards reported to the Drug Court team or judge when acting as tracker. Other Drug Court actors identified Krigbaum as Edwards’s supervisor; Edwards considered the Drug Court administrator his supervisor.
- After S.M. provided an audiotape alleging assaults, Krigbaum learned of the misconduct on December 1, 2010, initiated an external investigation, confronted Edwards, and allowed him to resign (saying he would be fired).
- The district court denied Krigbaum qualified immunity, citing (1) that Krigbaum failed to enforce a department radio-mileage policy when deputies transported opposite-sex persons while Edwards served as tracker, and (2) a genuine issue whether Krigbaum "turned a blind eye" to warning signs (e.g., taking participants out for cigarettes). The Eighth Circuit reviews denial of qualified immunity de novo and reverses.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Sheriff Krigbaum is individually liable for supervisory failure (denial of qualified immunity) for Edwards’s constitutional violations | Krigbaum knew or should have known of problematic conduct and failed to supervise or enforce policies, turning a blind eye to warning signs; negligence suffices | Krigbaum had no actual notice of a pattern of sexual misconduct by Edwards as tracker, took prompt action when informed, and cannot be held for negligent supervision | Reversed: Krigbaum entitled to qualified immunity — plaintiffs failed to prove he had notice of a pattern of unconstitutional acts required for supervisory liability |
| Whether plaintiffs proved deliberate indifference by Krigbaum (subjective standard) | Deliberate indifference can be shown by failing to supervise when having a duty to do so; prior team confusion does not absolve him | Deliberate indifference requires subjective knowledge of a substantial risk and drawing the inference; plaintiffs admitted Krigbaum had no actual knowledge | Reversed: Plaintiffs did not show subjective deliberate indifference; admission of no actual knowledge is fatal |
| Whether failing to enforce the radio-mileage policy can create supervisory liability | Failure to enforce the mileage policy (when opposite-sex transport occurred) created an unconstitutional policy that facilitated assaults | The mileage rule was protective, not an unconstitutional policy; non-enforcement alone is insufficient absent notice of similar constitutional violations | Reversed: No supervisory liability based on non-enforcement of the mileage policy |
| Jurisdiction to review denial of qualified immunity on appeal | Plaintiffs: appeal presents factual sufficiency issues and is nonappealable under Johnson v. Jones | Krigbaum: court can review the purely legal question whether the facts (viewed favorably to plaintiffs) show a clearly established violation | Court: Exercise of interlocutory appellate jurisdiction is proper; reviews legal issues de novo |
Key Cases Cited
- Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 (establishes qualified immunity standard)
- Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511 (interlocutory appeal of qualified immunity legal question)
- Johnson v. Jones, 515 U.S. 304 (limits appeal of summary judgment denials to legal issues, not pure factual sufficiency)
- Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825 (subjective deliberate indifference standard: must know and draw inference of substantial risk)
- Livers v. Schenck, 700 F.3d 340 (supervisory liability requires notice of a pattern of unconstitutional acts)
- Walton v. Dawson, 752 F.3d 1109 (individualized analysis for supervisory qualified immunity; subjective standard for deliberate indifference)
- Kahle v. Leonard, 477 F.3d 544 (supervisor can be reckless/indifferent when aware of risk even if unaware of actual harm)
- Johnson v. Phillips, 664 F.3d 232 (defines substantive due process violation for egregious sexual assault by officer)
- Moore v. Briggs, 381 F.3d 771 (negligent failure to supervise is not a constitutional violation)