The Municipal Litigation Reporter
GOODING COUNTY, Idaho — The U.S. District Court for the District of Idaho held that a city is entitled to the dismissal of an emergency services employee’s claims stemming from an altercation he had with a police officer.
An altercation ensued between P.J. Curtis, a Gooding County Emergency Medical Services (EMS) provider, and Andrew Lovell, a city of Gooding police officer. Specifically, Curtis claimed that, while he was in the process of beginning to transport a patient to the hospital, Lovell approached the ambulance, opened the door to the rear compartment, ordered Curtis to exit the ambulance and told Curtis they “needed to talk.” According to Curtis, once he exited the ambulance, Lovell threatened him, verbally abused him and physically struck him in the chest.
Curtis reported the incident to his immediate supervisor and also to Denise Gill, the director of Gooding County EMS. Gill then met with Jeff Perry, the Gooding chief of police. Lovell was later suspended, pending completion of a Jerome City Police Department’s investigation. Ultimately, Lovell resigned from the city of Gooding Police Department.
The Jerome City Police Department issued a written report of its investigation of the altercation. The Jerome City Police Department concluded that both Curtis and Lovell acted inappropriately; however, without additional witnesses or evidence, a formal finding of misconduct by either individual (beyond the admissions of both Curtis and Lovell) could not be sustained.
Thereafter, Curtis sued the city, Perry and Lovell (in his capacity as an employee of the city of Gooding only) alleging: (1) assault against Lovell (individually and in his capacity as an employee of the city of Gooding and the city of Gooding; (2) battery against Lovell (individually and in his capacity as an employee of the city of Gooding) and the city of Gooding; and (3) violation of 42 U.S.C. §1983 against Lovell (individually and in his capacity as an employee of the city of Gooding), Perry (individually and in his capacity as an employee of the city of Gooding), and the city of Gooding. The defendants moved for summary judgment.
The district court granted the defendants’ motion as to Curtis’ assault and battery claims against the city of Gooding since the city was immune from liability under Idaho Code §6-904(3). However, the court denied the defendants’ motion as to Curtis’ assault and battery claims against Lovell in his official capacity. Material questions of fact existed in the record which precluded the entry of summary judgment as to Lovell.
The district court also granted the defendants’ motion as to Curtis’ §1983 claims against Lovell (in his official capacity), Perry (individually and in his official capacity), and the city of Gooding. Contrary to Curtis’ argument, there was insufficient evidence of an alleged ratification of Lovell’s conduct by the city. As to Perry, Curtis failed to establish facts which would have made him individually liable and, further, he was entitled to qualified immunity.
Copyright 2012 Strafford Publications, Inc.
All Rights Reserved