Opinion ID: 4534911
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Supervision Policy – “Widespread Practice”

Text: Regarding supervision, Laura’s submissions outline various alleged infractions and instances of wrongdoing by other officers employed by the MPD in support of her “widespread practice” supervision claim. She adds: “nearly one-half of the City’s police were fired or resigned in a six-month period.” None of the conduct alleged, however, bears the necessary similarity to the purposeful fabrication and planting of evidence/false arrest misconduct involved here. Indeed, in many instances, the allegations reflect some disciplinary or other remedial actions being taken by the supervising police chief. Furthermore, a voluntary resignation is not itself indicative of an inadequate supervision policy. Finally, without more information, the departure numbers alleged by Laura are not particularly meaningful. For instance, no assertion of typical turnover rates is given, especially for a smalltown police force of, at most, only 6–8 officers. Thus, the district court’s rejection of these assertions as supporting an actionable claim warrants affirmance.