Opinion ID: 804143
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The Claim Against IA

Text: Ordinarily, a non-governmental organization like IA is not subject to § 1983 claims. In some circumstances, though, the conduct of a private party may be fairly attribut[ed] to the State, Lugar v. Edmondson Oil Co., 457 U.S. 922, 937 (1982), and therefore may constitute action under color of state law. These circumstances are rare, see Estades-Negroni v. CPC Hosp. San Juan Capestrano, 412 F.3d 1, 4 (1st Cir. 2005), and the plaintiff bears the burden of proving that a private party's acts constitute state action, see Flagg Bros. v. Brooks, 436 U.S. 149, 156 (1978). We use three tests to determine whether a private party may be considered a state actor: the public function test, the state compulsion test, and the nexus/joint action test. See Santiago, 655 F.3d at 68; Estades-Negroni, 412 F.3d at 5; Alberto San, Inc. v. Consejo de Titulares del Condominio San Alberto, 522 F.3d 1, 4 (1st Cir. 2008). Mead relies only on the state compulsion test, which requires that a state exercise such coercive power or . . . provide[] such significant encouragement, either overt or covert, that the [private party's] choice must in law be deemed to be that of the State. Blum v. Yaretsky, 457 U.S. 991, 1004 (1982). To survive the dismissal of her claim against IA, then, Mead had to allege that DHHS compelled IA to fire her. She did not do so. There is no allegation that DHHS ordered Mead terminated from her employment, which is the essence -7- of Mead's claim. So far as DHHS was concerned, Mead could have continued to work in some capacity at Goldeneye, as well as remained in her position as the administrator of IA's fourteen other assisted living facilities. The complaint makes clear that IA eliminated those possibilities only after conducting its own investigation into Mead's supervision of SF. Moreover, IA acted at least in part for its own reasons, citing Mead's poor rapport with IA's president as one ground for her termination. Hence, IA's choice to fire Mead cannot be deemed to be that of the State, Blum, 457 U.S. at 1004, and IA cannot be held accountable for that choice under § 1983.