Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Rafferty v. PGC 423 F.supp. 1045 (1)

Rafferty v. PGC 423 F.supp. 1045 (1)

Ratings: (0)|Views: 5 |Likes:
Published by Thalia Sanders

More info:

Published by: Thalia Sanders on May 24, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





United States District Court, D. Maryland.Margie Lemon RAFFETY and Robert RaymondRaffety, Plaintiffs,v.PRINCE GEORGE'S COUNTY et al., Defendants.
Civ. A. No. M-75-768.
Nov. 1, 1976.Plaintiffs, a white husband and black wife, whosethree children had been killed in fire which des-troyed the family's home, brought action againstcounty and certain members of police and fire de-partments to recover for denial of civil rights as aresult of alleged maliciously and racially motivatedinvestigation of the fire. On motions to dismiss, theDistrict Court, James R. Miller, Jr., J., held thatcomplaint stated cause of action against the policeofficers who conducted the investigation and theirsuperiors who allegedly had adopted policies de-signed to deny equal protection to blacks and per-sons who associate with them; that the qualified im-munity enjoyed by the superior officers could notsupport motion to dismiss; the court would exercisependent jurisdiction over state law claims based ondefamation, invasion of privacy, false imprison-ment, and intentional infliction of willful distrust;that the complaint set forth cause of action for mon-etary and equitable relief against county under civilrights statute guaranteeing all persons the sameright to full and equal benefit of all laws and pro-ceedings for the security of persons and property asis enjoyed by white citizens; that the 14th amend-ment does not create a cause of action for damages;and that the jurisdictional amount was present.Order accordingly.West Headnotes
[1]Civil Rights 78 1396
78Civil Rights78IIIFederal Remedies in General78k1392Pleading 78k1396k. Color of State Law; State Ac-tion.Most Cited Cases(Formerly 78k236, 78k13.12(8))Allegations that husband and wife were subjectedto unwarranted detention, interrogation, and sub-sequent investigation by officers who were raciallymotivated and who did not have probable causewere sufficient to state a claim under civil rightsstatute dealing with deprivation of rights under col-or of law; complaint did not merely seek damagesfor failure of police officers to give Miranda warn-ings.42 U.S.C.A. § 1983.
[2]Federal Courts 170B 15
170BFederal Courts170BIJurisdiction and Powers in General170BI(A)In General 170Bk14Jurisdiction of Entire Contro-versy; Pendent Jurisdiction170Bk15k.Federal Question Cases in General, Claims Pendent To.Most Cited Cases(Formerly 106k263(5))Federal court which had jurisdiction over claimsagainst police officers and fire department investig-ators and their superiors under civil rights statutewould exercise pendent jurisdiction over stateclaims based on defamation, negligence, assault,false imprisonment, invasion of privacy, and inflic-tion of willful distress.28 U.S.C.A. § 1331;42 U.S.C.A. § 1983.
[3]Federal Civil Procedure 170A 633.1
170AFederal Civil Procedure170AVIIPleadings and Motions170AVII(A)Pleadings in General 170Ak633Certainty, Definiteness andParticularity170Ak633.1k. In General.Most Cited Cases(Formerly 170Ak633)Page 1423 F.Supp. 1045
(Cite as: 423 F.Supp. 1045)
© 2010 Thomson Reuters. No Claim to Orig. US Gov. Works.
Complaint which alleged that police officers de-tained wife against her will for a period of 14 hoursduring which they repeatedly accused her of mur-dering her own children, made her believe that shewould suffer bodily harm, harassed and intimidatedher, and made her suffer extreme emotional distressand which alleged that husband was thereafter de-tained against his will for a period in excess of tenhours during which he was subjected to treatmentsimilar to that inflicted upon the wife and that theactions of the police officers were racially motiv-ated was sufficiently specific.
[4]Civil Rights 78 1354
78Civil Rights78IIIFederal Remedies in General78k1353Liability of Public Officials 78k1354k. In General.Most Cited Cases (Formerly 78k207(1), 78k13.8(1))Cause of action cannot be brought for damagesagainst government officials or employees acting intheir official capacities under civil rights statutedealing with deprivation of rights under color of law.42 U.S.C.A. § 1983.
[5]Civil Rights 78 1354
78Civil Rights78IIIFederal Remedies in General78k1353Liability of Public Officials 78k1354k. In General.Most Cited Cases (Formerly 78k207(1), 78k13.7)Cause of action for damages under civil rights stat-ute granting all persons the same right to full andequal benefit of all laws and proceedings for the se-curity of persons and property as is enjoyed bywhite citizens can be maintained against govern-ment officials and employees acting in their officialcapacity.42 U.S.C.A. § 1981.
[6]Civil Rights 78 1376(4)
78Civil Rights78IIIFederal Remedies in General78k1372Privilege or Immunity; Good Faith and Probable Cause78k1376Government Agencies and Of-ficers78k1376(4)k. Municipalities andCounties and Their Officers.Most Cited Cases(Formerly 78k214(4), 78k13.8(3))
Federal Civil Procedure 170A 1752.1
170AFederal Civil Procedure170AXIDismissal170AXI(B)Involuntary Dismissal 170AXI(B)2Grounds in General170Ak1752AffirmativeDefenses,Raising by Motion to Dismiss170Ak1752.1k. In General.MostCited Cases(Formerly 170Ak1752)Any immunity which might extend to superior of-ficers of certain policemen and firemen who wereallegedly engaged in a maliciously and racially mo-tivated investigation would be qualified and subjectto proof of the superiors, that they acted upon reas-onable grounds and in good faith; the defense couldnot support motion to dismiss.
[7]Civil Rights 78 1336
78Civil Rights78IIIFederal Remedies in General78k1334Persons Liable in General 78k1336k. Vicarious or Respondeat Su-perior Liability in General.Most Cited Cases(Formerly 78k205(1), 78k13.7)Doctrine of respondeat superior is not applicable toactions under civil rights statutes dealing withdeprivation of rights under color of law and grant-ing all persons full and equal benefit of all laws andproceedings for the security of persons and prop-erty.42 U.S.C.A. §§ 1981,1983.
[8]Civil Rights 78 1395(5)
78Civil Rights78IIIFederal Remedies in General78k1392Pleading Page 2423 F.Supp. 1045
(Cite as: 423 F.Supp. 1045)
© 2010 Thomson Reuters. No Claim to Orig. US Gov. Works.
78k1395Particular Causes of Action78k1395(4)Criminal Law Enforce-ment; Police and Prosecutors78k1395(5)k. In General.Most Cited Cases(Formerly 78k235(5.1), 78k235(5),78k13.12(4))Allegations that defendants, superior officers incounty police and fire department, advised countypolice, without justification, that fire was caused byarson and that defendants established policies,guidelines, and patterns of conduct designed todeny members of the black race equal protection of law with the result that certain police and fire de-partment investigators maliciously harassed ownersof house which burned stated claim under civilrights statute guaranteeing to all persons the fulland equal benefit of all laws and proceedings forthe security of persons and property as is enjoyedby white citizens.42 U.S.C.A. § 1981.
[9]Civil Rights 78 1331(4)
78Civil Rights78IIIFederal Remedies in General78k1328Persons Protected and Entitled to Sue78k1331Persons Aggrieved, and Standingin General78k1331(4)k. CriminalLaw Enforce-ment; Prisons.Most Cited Cases(Formerly 78k201, 78k13.11)Plaintiffs who alleged that policies, guidelines, andpatterns of conduct established by officers and po-lice and fire department caused plaintiffs to be de-tained, interrogated, and investigated because of race alleged a direct, nonabstract injury which wasunique from that sustained by all members of thepublic as result of adoption of the policies andplaintiffs thus had standing to assert civil rightsclaims based on the adoption and enforcement of those policies.42 U.S.C.A. § 1981.
[10]Civil Rights 78 1343
78Civil Rights78IIIFederal Remedies in General78k1342Liability of Municipalities and Oth- er Governmental Bodies78k1343k. In General.Most Cited Cases (Formerly 78k206(1), 78k13.7)County is not a “person” within meaning of civilrights statute.42 U.S.C.A. § 1983.
[11]Civil Rights 78 1395(1)
78Civil Rights78IIIFederal Remedies in General78k1392Pleading 78k1395Particular Causes of Action78k1395(1)k. In General.Most Cited Cases(Formerly 78k235(1), 78k13.12(7))Persons who alleged that they were the target of amalicious campaign conducted by certain countyofficers and who sought, in addition to damages,such other and further relief as may be “just andproper” stated claim under the Fourteenth Amend-ment against county for injunction against continu-ing investigation.28 U.S.C.A. §1331; U.S.C.A.Const. Amend. 14.
[12]Federal Courts 170B 177
170BFederal Courts170BIIIFederal Question Jurisdiction170BIII(B)CasesArising Under the Consti- tution170Bk177k. Due Process and Equal Pro-tection in General.Most Cited Cases(Formerly 106k282.2(1))Federal court does not have power to grant monet-ary damages as relief in actions brought under theFourteenth Amendment.U.S.C.A.Const. Amend.14.
[13]Federal Courts 170B 270
170BFederal Courts170BIVCitizenship, Residence or Character of Parties, Jurisdiction Dependent on170BIV(A)In General Page 3423 F.Supp. 1045
(Cite as: 423 F.Supp. 1045)
© 2010 Thomson Reuters. No Claim to Orig. US Gov. Works.

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->