Kamenesh v. City of Miami

772 F. Supp. 583 (1991) United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida 1991-07-15

civil; police captain sues city and five superior officers (official and individual capacities) for due-process deprivations of property and liberty; defendants' motion for summary judgment (result: claimant-won)

Facts

  1. 5 Municipal policy or custom as moving force (Monell v. Department of Social Services) satisfied triable
    Dickson accepted Oboz’s recommendations to transfer Kamenesh out of SIS and to instigate an Internal Security investigation into Kamenesh’s associations with Anatasia and his alleged insubordination to Oboz.
  2. 5 Municipal policy or custom as moving force (Monell v. Department of Social Services) satisfied triable
    Police Chief Dickson elected instead to impose a six month extension of Kamenesh’s probationary period as captain and to eliminate forty hours of Plaintiff’s earned overtime.
  3. 5 Municipal policy or custom as moving force (Monell v. Department of Social Services) satisfied triable
    the decisions of the two police chiefs involved and the direct and indirect ratification of those decisions by two different city managers concerning the incidents complained of constitute acts by “final policymakers”
  4. 14 Qualified immunity for government officials sued in individual capacity (Harlow v. Fitzgerald; Pearson v. Callahan) not no-evidence
    If Plaintiff proves his allegations that he was defamed and demoted and kept from promotion, all without cause, it is likely that no qualified immunity will attach to the Defendants’ conduct.
  5. 14 Qualified immunity for government officials sued in individual capacity (Harlow v. Fitzgerald; Pearson v. Callahan) not no-evidence
    A reasonable police officer would know, at a minimum, that such conduct violated clearly established statutory rights prohibiting adverse treatment of public employees without cause.
  6. 14 Qualified immunity for government officials sued in individual capacity (Harlow v. Fitzgerald; Pearson v. Callahan) not no-evidence
    Upon resolving the factual disputes underlying the legal conclusion of qualified immunity at trial, the court may well yet find that some or all Defendants possess such immunity in their individual capacities.