Are public employers responsible for the actions of their contractors?  In Seelig v. Ramsey County, the Minnesota district court examined municipal tort liability resulting from the violation of constitutional rights pursuant to § 1983 and availability of punitive damages as a remedy under that same provision.

The Plaintiff, Jennifer Seelig (the Plaintiff), was sexually assaulted by an employee of Defendant, Inmate Services Corporation (ISC), a prison transport provider under a service contract with the Defendant, Ramsey County (County).

The Plaintiff brought §1983 claims against the County for violation of her constitutional rights for  (1) engaging in an unofficial custom of indifference to misconduct by ISC; and (2) failure to supervise ISC’s compliance with statutory and contractual requirements. The requested remedy included punitive damages. The County brought a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss. The motion was denied on the tort claims and granted with respect to punitive damages.

In its decision, the court explained that §1983 liability attaches if the municipality, under color of state law,  ordinance, statute,  custom, or usage, deprives an individual of the rights, privileges or immunities secured by the Constitution. In denying the County’s motion in part, the court found the Plaintiff had alleged facts that plausibly supported all elements of an unofficial custom claim, which requires:

• Continuing, widespread and persistent pattern of  misconduct by municipality employees;
• Deliberate indifference to or authorization of the conduct after notice to officials of the misconduct; and
• Constitutional violation and injury results from the misconduct.

The Plaintiff alleged the County had knowledge of widespread abuses within the private prison transport industry and direct knowledge of a sexual assault of a detainee while in route to the County by its prior prison transport contractor.

With respect to the current contractor, ISC, the Plaintiff claimed widely publicized lawsuits against ISC nationwide for similar misconduct were sufficient to establish the County knew or should have known of ISC’s history of misconduct. She further alleged the County exhibited deliberate indifference, when the County failed to take precautionary measures background examinations and implementation of other safeguards, which resulted in Plaintiff’s harm.

For similar reasons the Court denied dismissal of Plaintiff’s negligent supervision and negligent hiring claims which alleged the County had not taken sufficient remedial action after learning of industry abuses, such as requiring the contractor to obtain required licensing, providing required training, staffing female transport employees and installing surveillance on transport vehicles.

Citing to precedent in the U.S. Supreme Court and circuit courts nationwide (including the Eighth Circuit), the court concluded counties are not subject to punitive damages arising from §1983 and dismissed plaintiff’s request for punitive damages.

This is another example municipalities facing liability when consistent compliance practices are not followed. If you or your organization need assistance establishing policies and procedures for consistent practices, contact Wiley Reber Law, for legal advice that works.