—In an action to recover damages for violation of his Federal constitutional rights under 42 USC § 1983, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Lerner, J.), dated March 5, 1991, which granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The plaintiff was tried and convicted of murder, felony murder, attempted robbery in the first degree, and unlawful possession of a weapon. The conviction was upheld by this Court (see, People v Jackson,
The plaintiff then commenced this action to recover damages for false arrest, false imprisonment, and deprivation of civil rights. Upon the defendants’ motion, the plaintiff’s causes of action sounding in false arrest and false imprisonment were dismissed for failure to serve a timely notice of claim. However, the claim sounding in deprivation of civil rights was held to be timely.
A municipality can be found liable under 42 USC § 1983 for deprivation of constitutional rights only where the municipality itself causes the constitutional violation at issue (see, Monell v New York City Dept. of Social Servs.,
The plaintiff in this case failed to show that the City did not adequately train its police officers. Indeed, in opposing the defendants’ motion, the plaintiff presented an affidavit of his expert, a former sergeant in the police department, which stated merely that "[t]he procedures employed by the officers and detectives in this matter were incorrect and in violation of the existing policy, practices and procedures of the New York City Police Department”. A city would not be automatically liable pursuant to 42 USC § 1983 if one of its employees happened to apply its policies in an unconstitutional manner, for liability may not rest on the doctrine of respondeat superior (see, Canton v Harris, supra, at 387). The plaintiff also failed to set forth evidence of municipal supervisory indifference on the part of the municipality, such as acquiescence in a prior pattern of conduct, from which a custom or policy could be inferred (see, Turpin v Mailet, 619 F2d 196, cert denied sub nom. Turpin v City of W. Haven,
