519 F.Supp.3d 301
M.D. La.2021Background
- Deputy McLin shot and killed Plaintiffs’ dog Roscoe after a minor “nip” to the deputy’s calf while serving a jury summons; Roscoe was shot multiple times and died near his owner.
- Plaintiffs sued Deputy McLin and Sheriff Jason Ard under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (illegal seizure), and under state law for conversion, respondeat superior, and negligent hiring/training/supervision; they seek compensatory and punitive damages.
- Plaintiffs allege Sheriff Ard maintained policies/customs of failing to train/supervise/equip deputies for non‑lethal animal encounters, citing prior incidents involving Deputy McLin (pleaded "upon information and belief").
- The Court previously dismissed many claims against Ard with leave to amend; Plaintiffs filed a First Amended Complaint and Ard moved to dismiss again under Rule 12(b)(6).
- The Court held Plaintiffs’ allegations against Ard remained conclusory: insufficient prior‑incident detail to show a municipal custom, inadequate specificity about defective training, and no plausible deliberate indifference; state‑law claims barred by La. R.S. 9:2798.1 discretionary‑function immunity.
- Result: all claims against Sheriff Ard except the state respondeat superior claim for Deputy McLin’s actions are dismissed with prejudice; leave to further amend denied as futile.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Official‑capacity §1983 (Monell) — municipal liability for failure to train/supervise regarding animal encounters | Ard failed to train/supervise deputies (civil process servers) in non‑lethal animal encounters; prior dog killings by McLin show a pattern | Allegations are conclusory; prior‑incident assertion lacks detail/quantity and cannot establish a custom or deliberate indifference | Dismissed — plaintiffs failed to plead a sufficiently persistent, specific pattern or defective training causally tied to the violation |
| Individual‑capacity §1983 — supervisory liability and qualified immunity | Ard is the policymaker who hired, suspended, and reinstated McLin and thus is personally liable for failing to act | No personal participation or causal connection; allegations are conclusory; qualified immunity protects Ard | Dismissed — no plausible allegation of personal involvement, unconstitutional policy implementation, or deliberate indifference |
| State tort claims for negligent hiring/training/supervising (La.) and alleged intentional misconduct exception to immunity | Plaintiffs contend Ard’s conduct was criminal/malicious or otherwise outside discretionary immunity | Hiring, training, supervision are discretionary functions; no facts alleging conduct rises to criminal/fraudulent/intentional misconduct | Dismissed — La. R.S. 9:2798.1 bars these claims; plaintiffs’ allegations of misconduct are conclusory |
| Leave to Amend | Plaintiffs request leave to cure pleading defects | Ard opposes; court previously gave leave and deficiencies remain | Leave denied — repeated failure to cure and further amendment would be futile |
Key Cases Cited
- Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007) (pleading must state plausibly actionable claims)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009) (courts need not accept conclusory legal allegations)
- Monell v. Dep't of Soc. Servs., 436 U.S. 658 (1978) (municipal liability only for policy/custom causing constitutional violation)
- Connick v. Thompson, 563 U.S. 51 (2011) (deliberate indifference standard for failure‑to‑train claims; pattern ordinarily required)
- City of Canton v. Harris, 489 U.S. 378 (1989) (failure‑to‑train may establish municipal liability if training inadequate and moving force)
- Lormand v. U.S. Unwired, Inc., 565 F.3d 228 (5th Cir. 2009) (pleading must give reasonable expectation discovery will reveal necessary evidence)
- Pineda v. City of Houston, 291 F.3d 325 (5th Cir. 2002) (insufficient prior incidents cannot establish a policy/custom)
- Peterson v. City of Fort Worth, 588 F.3d 838 (5th Cir. 2009) (requirement of similarity, specificity, and sufficient number of prior incidents to show pattern)
- Valle v. City of Houston, 613 F.3d 536 (5th Cir. 2010) (elements for Monell claim and heightened causation/deliberate indifference standard)
- Porter v. Epps, 659 F.3d 440 (5th Cir. 2011) (supervisory liability requires affirmative participation or implementation of unconstitutional policy; deliberate indifference standard)
- Roberts v. City of Shreveport, 397 F.3d 287 (5th Cir. 2005) (La. discretionary‑function immunity analysis analogous to FTCA test)