Resident Allegedly Beaten by Cop Can't Sue Township Supervisor
A federal judge has ruled that a township treasurer doubling as a supervisor can't be held liable for a police officer's alleged assault on a resident.
October 17, 2017 at 04:55 PM
3 minute read
A federal judge has ruled that a township treasurer doubling as a supervisor can't be held liable for a police officer's alleged assault on a resident.
U.S. District Judge William W. Caldwell of the Middle District of Pennsylvania tossed Perry County resident and plaintiff Gary L. Korth's civil rights case against Oliver Township supervisor Jill Hoover. Caldwell held that Hoover could not be held liable for the alleged actions of the officer because she did not supervise him.
Korth originally sued another supervisor, Joseph R. Baker, along with Hoover. Baker was eventually let out of the case and several of Korth's claims were dismissed, leaving only two counts solely against Hoover: a federal excessive force claim and a state-law assault and battery claim. The officer in question, Mark Botts, is deceased.
According to Caldwell's opinion, Korth went to the township office to review its ledgers out of concern over how the township was paying its bills. Korth alleged that he was approached by Botts in Hoover's office and told to leave. Korth said he refused and claimed that Botts struck him several times and kneed him in the groin. He alleged Hoover ignored his cries for help.
Hoover called the state police. Afterward, Trooper Ryan French interviewed Korth, according to Caldwell, and reported that he could not recall Korth stating that he was injured. Caldwell said Korth drove himself to the hospital, complaining of chest pains, but did not wait long enough to be seen by a doctor.
In Hoover's response to Korth's lawsuit, she argued that a single township supervisor can't be liable for an excessive force claim when the board of supervisors as a whole is responsible for hiring and paying officers.
“We agree with defendant that she cannot be liable on the excessive force claim because she was not Botts' supervisor at the time of the altercation,” Caldwell said. “There is nothing in the record establishing that individual supervisors were given supervisory authority over Botts; there is only the statutory authority conferred on the board of supervisors to 'provide for the organization and supervision … of … police officers.' Without supervisory authority, Hoover cannot be liable for Botts' actions.”
Korth also argued that Hoover violated his rights because she knew of complaints in another county that Botts handed out business cards for a “men's club,” Caldwell said.
“Plaintiff argues that knowledge of these complaints and Hoover's failure to do anything about them establishes her personal involvement in Botts' conduct. But we fail to see the connection,” Caldwell said. “Plaintiff's argument, although couched as one dealing with personal involvement, appears to be an attempt to resurrect a claim that Hoover is liable because she established and maintained a policy, practice or custom that directly caused the constitutional harm.”
Caldwell further ruled that Hoover did not commit assault and battery.
“First, Hoover, as an individual, was not Botts' superior. Second, the evidence cannot be interpreted in the way plaintiff does,” Caldwell said. ”We believe the record shows that Hoover did not instruct or encourage Botts in his actions.”
The township's lawyer, Jeffrey B. Rettig, and Korth's attorney, Roger R. Laguna, did not respond to requests for comment.
P.J. D'Annunzio can be contacted at 215-557-2315 or [email protected]. Follow him on Twitter @PJDannunzioTLI.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllImmunity for Mental Health Care and Coverage for CBD: What's on the Pa. High Court's November Calendar
5 minute readSlip-and-Fall Suit Cleared to Proceed Against Kalahari Indoor Waterpark
3 minute readVolunteering for Voter Protection Efforts, Pa. Firms Brace for Contentious Election
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250