Opinion ID: 223270
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The Monell and Supervisory Liability Claims

Text: Qualified immunity does not shield municipalities from liability. Owen v. City of Independence, 445 U.S. 622, 657, 100 S.Ct. 1398, 63 L.Ed.2d 673 (1980). However, we may affirm the district court's dismissal on any ground supported by the record. Wolfe v. Strankman, 392 F.3d 358, 362 (9th Cir.2004). Under Twombly, the Complaint does not state a plausible cause of action for either municipal or supervisory liability. A government entity may not be held liable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, unless a policy, practice, or custom of the entity can be shown to be a moving force behind a violation of constitutional rights. Monell v. Dep't of Soc. Servs. of the City of New York, 436 U.S. 658, 694, 98 S.Ct. 2018, 56 L.Ed.2d 611 (1978). In order to establish liability for governmental entities under Monell, a plaintiff must prove (1) that [the plaintiff] possessed a constitutional right of which [s]he was deprived; (2) that the municipality had a policy; (3) that this policy amounts to deliberate indifference to the plaintiff's constitutional right; and, (4) that the policy is the moving force behind the constitutional violation. Plumeau v. Sch. Dist. No. 40 Cnty. of Yamhill, 130 F.3d 432, 438 (9th Cir. 1997) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted; alterations in original). Failure to train may amount to a policy of deliberate indifference, if the need to train was obvious and the failure to do so made a violation of constitutional rights likely. City of Canton v. Harris, 489 U.S. 378, 390, 109 S.Ct. 1197, 103 L.Ed.2d 412 (1989). Similarly, a failure to supervise that is sufficiently inadequate may amount to deliberate indifference. Davis v. City of Ellensburg, 869 F.2d 1230, 1235 (9th Cir.1989). Mere negligence in training or supervision, however, does not give rise to a Monell claim. Id. Here, Dougherty's Monell and supervisory liability claims lack any factual allegations that would separate them from the formulaic recitation of a cause of action's elements deemed insufficient by Twombly. See 550 U.S. at 555, 127 S.Ct. 1955. Regarding the Monell claim, Dougherty alleged only that (1) Defendant CITY's policies and/or customs caused the specific violations of Plaintiff's constitutional rights at issue in this case[ ] and (2) Defendant CITY's polices and/or customs were the moving force and/or affirmative link behind the violation of the Plaintiff's constitutional rights and injury, damage and/or harm caused thereby. The Complaint lacked any factual allegations regarding key elements of the Monell claims, or, more specifically, any facts demonstrating that his constitutional deprivation was the result of a custom or practice of the City of Covina or that the custom or practice was the moving force behind his constitutional deprivation. Regarding supervisory liability, Dougherty alleged only negligent hiring and training and pointed to no instances of deliberate indifference. Dougherty failed to plead enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face. Twombly, 550 U.S. at 570, 127 S.Ct. 1955. Therefore, we affirm the district court's dismissal of these claims.