Opinion ID: 820732
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Claims Against Sheriff Strain

Text: As to the claims against Sheriff Strain, Glotfelty alleged that his arrest “by Doe was improper, lacked probable cause, or any legal basis, and was in violation” of federal and state law.3 The complaint averred that Sheriff Strain is liable under a theory of respondeat superior for any acts and omissions committed by STPSO employees in the course and scope of their employment, including those undertaken in connection with Glotfelty’s attachment. Glotfelty further alleged that Sheriff Strain is liable under § 1983 “as a result of inadequate training of deputies and as a result of policies and procedures [he] put into place . . . which clearly allowed for the unlawful arrest and imprisonment of [Glotfelty] when the attachment required him to be brought to Court.” We agree with the district court that these allegations cannot survive a motion to dismiss. To the extent Glotfelty alleged that Sheriff Strain, in his official capacity, is liable under § 1983 based on the theory of respondeat superior, the Supreme Court has rejected similar claims, holding “that a local government may not be sued under § 1983 for an injury inflicted solely by its employees or agents.” Monell v. Dep’t of Soc. Servs. of City of N.Y., 436 U.S. 658, 694 (1978); see also 3 With respect to any claims against Doe, we note that “the mere naming of a person through use of a fictitious name does not make that person a party absent voluntary appearance or proper service of process.” Nagle v. Lee, 807 F.2d 435, 440 (5th Cir. 1987). Relying on this authority, the district court concluded that Doe was not a party to this action. Because Glotfelty has not briefed any error regarding this ruling, he has abandoned any such claim. See Campillo v. U.S. Penitentiary Beaumont, Tex., 203 F. App’x 555, 556 (5th Cir. 2006) (citing Brinkmann v. Dall. Cnty. Deputy Sheriff Abner, 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987)). 12 Case: 12-30532 Document: 00512145045 Page: 13 Date Filed: 02/15/2013 No. 12-30532 Kentucky v. Graham, 473 U.S. 159, 166 (1985) (“[A]n official-capacity suit is, in all respects other than name, to be treated as a suit against the entity.”). Moreover, insofar as Glotfelty asserted that Sheriff Strain inadequately trained and supervised his deputies, or that he instituted improper policies and procedures, we agree with the district court that Glotfety’s allegations on this front are too vague and conclusory to survive a motion to dismiss. See Fernandez-Montes v. Allied Pilots Ass’n, 987 F.2d 278, 284 (5th Cir. 1993) (“[C]onclusory allegations or legal conclusions masquerading as factual conclusions will not suffice to prevent a motion to dismiss.”). Accordingly, we affirm the dismissal of Glotfelty’s federal claims against Sheriff Strain.