4.6.8 Section 1983 – Liability in Connection with the Actions of Another – Municipalities Liability Through Inadequate Screening – Model [Plaintiff] claims that [municipality] adopted a policy of inadequate screening, and that this policy caused the violation of [specify right]. Specifically, [plaintiff] claims that [plaintiff’s] [municipality] should be held liable because [municipality] did not adequately check [employee’s] background when hiring [him/her]. [Plaintiff] cannot establish that [municipality] is liable merely by showing that [municipality] hired [employee] and that [employee] violated [specify right]. [plaintiff’s] In order to hold [municipality] liable for violation of [specify [employee’s] [plaintiff’s] right], you must also find that [plaintiff] has proved each of the following three things by a preponderance of the evidence: First: [Municipality] failed to check adequately background when hiring [employee’s] [him/her]. Second: failure to check adequately background amounted [Municipality’s] [employee’s] to deliberate indifference to the risk that a violation of [specify right] would follow the hiring decision. Third: failure to check adequately background proximately [Municipality’s] [employee’s] caused the violation of that federal right. In order to find that failure to check adequately background [municipality’s] [employee’s] amounted to deliberate indifference, you must find that [plaintiff] has proved by a preponderance of the evidence that: adequate scrutiny of background would have led a reasonable policymaker [employee’s] to conclude that it was obvious that hiring [employee] would lead to the particular type of [constitutional] [statutory] violation that [plaintiff] alleges, namely [specify constitutional (or statutory) violation]. In order to find that failure to check adequately background [municipality’s] [employee’s] proximately caused the violation of federal right, you must find that [plaintiff] has [plaintiff’s] proved by a preponderance of the evidence that deliberate indifference led directly [municipality’s] to the deprivation of [specify right]. [plaintiff’s] Comment Although inadequate screening during the hiring process can form the basis for municipal
4.6.8 Section 1983 – Liability in Connection with the Actions of Another – Municipalities – Liability Through Inadequate Screening Model [Plaintiff] claims that [municipality] adopted a policy of inadequate screening, and that this policy caused the violation of [plaintiff’s] [specify right]. Specifically, [plaintiff] claims that [municipality] should be held liable because [municipality] did not adequately check [employee’s] background when hiring [him/her]. [Plaintiff] cannot establish that [municipality] is liable merely by showing that [municipality] hired [employee] and that [employee] violated [plaintiff’s] [specify right]. In order to hold [municipality] liable for [employee’s] violation of [plaintiff’s] [specify right], you must also find that [plaintiff] has proved each of the following three things by a preponderance of the evidence: First: [Municipality] failed to check adequately [employee’s] background when hiring [him/her]. Second: [Municipality’s] failure to check adequately [employee’s] background amounted to deliberate indifference to the risk that a violation of [specify right] would follow the hiring decision. Third: [Municipality’s] failure to check adequately [employee’s] background proximately caused the violation of that federal right. In order to find that [municipality’s] failure to check adequately [employee’s] background amounted to deliberate indifference, you must find that [plaintiff] has proved by a preponderance of the evidence that: adequate scrutiny of [employee’s] background would have led a reasonable policymaker to conclude that it was obvious that hiring [employee] would lead to the particular type of [constitutional] [statutory] violation that [plaintiff] alleges, namely [specify constitutional (or statutory) violation]. In order to find that [municipality’s] failure to check adequately [employee’s] background proximately caused the violation of [plaintiff’s] federal right, you must find that [plaintiff] has proved by a preponderance of the evidence that [municipality’s] deliberate indifference led directly to the deprivation of [plaintiff’s] [specify right]. Comment Although inadequate screening during the hiring process can form the basis for municipal
4_Chap_4_2016_May%20meeting%20to%20be%20posted.docx