# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ No. 1 3- 28 01

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ Troy C. Sm it h

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff - App el la nt

v.
Ci ty of St . Ann

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an t - Ap pe ll ee

__ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t fo r th e Eas te rn Dis tri ct of M is so ur i - St . Lou is

__ __ __ __ __ __ Subm it te d: May 7, 20 14 Fil ed : Au gu st 12 , 20 14 [Un pu bl is he d]

__ __ __ __ __ __ Befo re BYE, GRUENDER, and SHEPHERD, Circ ui t J ud ge s.

__ __ __ __ __ __ PER CURI AM.

Troy Sm it h ap pe al s th e di st ric t co ur t’s ad ve rs e gr an t of su m m ary jud gm en t in 1 th is 42 U.S.C. § 19 83 act io n ag ai ns t th e Ci ty of St

. Ann , Mi ss ou ri (Ci ty). On ap pe al ,

Th e Hon or ab le E. Ri ch ard W eb be r, Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Ju dg e fo r t h e 1 East ern Dis tri ctof M is so ur i.S mi t h arg ue s th at he an d hi s wife ’s m ul ti pl e co m

pl ai nt s to Ci ty em

pl oyees an d of fic ia ls ab ou t Sm it h’s in

jury, whi ch was le ft un tre at ed fo r se ve n da y s in Ci ty’ s jail , c o ns ti tu te d su ffi ci en t ev id en ce to ho ld Ci ty li ab le un de r se ct io n 19 83

. Smi t h a l s o arg ue s th at he an d hi s wife co m pl ai ne d to th e hi gh es t ran ki ng Ci ty of fic ia ls , an d th at th es e o ffi ci al s’ in act io n was su ffi ci en t t o e st ab li sh m un ic ip al li ab il it y
.
Upo n care fu l de no vo rev ie w, we co nc lu de th at th e di st ric t co ur t di d no t err in gr an ti ng su m

m ary jud gm en t. See Sch eel er v. Ci ty of St

. Cl ou d, Mi nn ., 40 2 F.3 d 82 6, 83 0 (8 th Ci r. 20 05 ) (d e no vo rev ie w). Fi rs t, we ag ree wit h th e di st ric t co ur t th at Sm it h’s ev id en ce di d no t su ffi ci en tl y es ta bl is h a Ci ty po li cy o r c u s to m th at wou ld

su bjec t Ci ty to s ect io n 1 98 3 li ab il it y
. See Mo ne ll v. Dep ’t of So c. Serv s., 4 36 U.S. 65 8, 69 0- 91 (1 97 8) (lo cal go ve rn m en t bo dy m ay be he ld li ab le un de r § 19 83 on ly if al le ge d u nc on st it ut io na l co nd uc t i m pl em en ts off

ic ia l po li cy or cu st om ); Jo hn so n v

. Dou gl as Cn ty. Med

. Dep ’t, 72 5 F.3 d 82 8 (8 th Ci r. 20 13 ) (to es ta bl is h “cus to m ” li ab il it y of lo cal go ve rn m en t en ti ty un de r § 19 83 fo r fai lu re to pr ov id e m ed ic al care , pl ai nt iff m

us t de m on st rat e (1 ) ex is te nc e of co nt in ui ng , wid es pr ead , pe rs is te nt pa tt ern of un co ns ti tu ti on al m is co nd uc t by go ve rn m en ta l en ti ty’ s em pl oyees, (2 ) de li be r a te in di ffer en ce to or ta ci t au th o r i z a t i o n of su ch co nd uc t by go ve rn m en ta l en ti ty’ s po li cym ak in g of

fic ia ls aft er no ti ce to of

fic ia ls of th at m is co nd uc t, an d (3 ) cu st om was
m ov in g fo rce be hi nd co ns ti tu ti on al v i o l a t io n)

. Seco nd , we co nc lu de th at Sm it h pr od uc ed in su ffi ci en t ev id en ce to rai se a tri ab le is su e as to whe th er a fin al po li cym ak er’s act io ns su bjec te d Ci ty to se ct io n 19 83 li ab il it y
. See Ru ss el l v. Hen ne pi n Cn ty., 4 2 0 F.3 d 84 1, 84 6 (8 th Ci r. 20 05 ) (m un ic ip al of

fic ia ls who ha ve fin al po li cym ak in g au th or it y m ay , by th ei r a c t i o n s, su bjec t go ve rn m en t to § 19 83 li ab il it y ); se e al so Mas on v. Co rr. Med

. Serv s., In c., 55 9 F.3 d 88 0, 88 5 (8 th Ci r. 20 09 ) (n on m ov in g pa rty m ay no t rel y on in ad m is si bl e he ars ay to av oi d su m m ary jud gm en t).

Acco rd in gl y , we affi rm . See 8 th Cir . R. 47 B.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

-2

-