Opinion ID: 799732
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Mayor Stack

Text: Munoz also brought a § 1983 claim against Mayor Stack. The District Court concluded that Munoz improperly sought to attribute liability to Mayor Stack based solely on Mayor Stack‟s supervisory authority over Martinetti. We agree. We will 11 affirm that portion of the District Court‟s Order granting summary judgment in favor of Mayor Stack. Mayor Stack is the Commissioner of Public Safety for Union City. The Construction Department is one of many departments that falls within the purview of Public Safety. Martinetti is the Construction Code Official who works within the Construction Department. Munoz‟s sole argument as to Mayor Stack is that he failed to properly supervise Martinetti by not promulgating a policy that would have prevented Martinetti from ordering an unwarranted demolition. The theory of respondeat superior cannot support a claim of liability under § 1983. See Evancho v. Fisher, 423 F.3d 347, 353 (3d Cir. 2005). Although Munoz claims that his failure to supervise argument is distinct from liability premised on respondeat superior, we can discern no difference. Aside from the fact that the demolition here was proper, absent any evidence that Mayor Stack “participated in violating [Munoz‟s] rights, directed others to violate them, or, as the person in charge, had knowledge of and acquiesced in his subordinates‟ violations[,]” Santiago v. Warminster Twp., 629 F.3d 121, 129 (3d Cir. 2010) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted), Munoz‟s theory of liability is indistinguishable from respondeat superior. Because Munoz has produced no facts demonstrating Mayor Stack‟s personal involvement, the District Court‟s grant of summary judgment in favor of Mayor Stack was appropriate. 12