No. 24-956

Los Angeles County, California, et al. v. Peter Woods Nyarecha, et al.

Lower Court: Ninth Circuit
Docketed: 2025-03-06
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Amici (1)Response Waived
Tags: cell-check-policy constitutional-violation monell-doctrine municipal-liability section-1983 summary-judgment
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity DueProcess JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference: 2025-04-17
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether video evidence from a single cell block on one night is sufficient to establish a municipal custom or practice under Monell liability

Question Presented (from Petition)

The Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department’s official policy requires deputy officers to regularly check inmates’ cells for signs of life. It is undisputed that the Department trains deputies on that policy. But plaintiffs contend that the Department has an unwritten custom or practice of not looking for signs of life—i.e., of deviating from official policy and training. They sued the Department and the County of Los Angeles under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and Monell v. Department of Social Services , 436 U.S. 658 (1978) on that theory. The district court granted summary judgment against them, but the Ninth Circuit reversed. The questions presented are: 1. Whether the Ninth Circuit departed from this Court’s precedent, and impermissibly expanded municipal liability, by holding that video of inmate cell checks from a single cell block on a single night is enough to establish a custom or practice subjecting a county to Monell liability. 2. Whether conduct by multiple deputies on a single night constitutes a “single incident” for purposes of the rule that generally, “[p]roof of a single incident of unconstitutional activity is not sufficient to impose liability under Monell ,” City of Oklahoma City v. Tuttle , 471 U.S. 808, 823-24 (1985).

Docket Entries

2025-04-21
Petition DENIED.
2025-04-01
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/17/2025.
2025-03-31
Amicus brief of The International Municipal Lawyers Association and The California State Association of Counties submitted.
2025-03-31
Brief amici curiae of The International Municipal Lawyers Association, et al. filed. (Distributed)
2025-03-26
Waiver of Peter Woods Nyarecha, et al. of right to respond submitted.
2025-03-26
Waiver of right of respondent Peter Woods Nyarecha, et al. to respond filed.
2025-03-04
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due April 7, 2025)

Attorneys

County of Los Angeles, et al.
Alana H. RotterGreines, Martin, Stein & Richland LLP, Petitioner
Alana H. RotterGreines, Martin, Stein & Richland LLP, Petitioner
Peter Woods Nyarecha, et al.
John Christopher BurtonThe Law Offices of John Burton, Respondent
John Christopher BurtonThe Law Offices of John Burton, Respondent
The International Municipal Lawyers Association and The California State Association of Counties
Thomas Peter PierceRichards, Watson & Gershon, Amicus
Thomas Peter PierceRichards, Watson & Gershon, Amicus