Exam 23: Legal Liabilities

In high-speed vehicle pursuit cases that result in fatal injuries, liability in § 1983 cases ensues only if the conduct of the officer ________.

Public officials cannot be sued as private individuals.

One of the elements of a § 1983 case is that there must have been a violation of a ________.

Which of the following Supreme Court decisions relieves some pressure from counties for liability when hiring police officers?

Which of the following cannot be sued under "Section 1983"?

________ under federal law provides that the officer is not held liable unless he or she violated a clearly established constitutional rule of which a reasonable person would have known.

Which of the following is not a sub classification of police liability?

Inadequate police training may serve as the basis for municipal liability under §1983, but only if the failure to train amounts to ________ to the right of persons with whom the police come into contact.

A municipality has immunity to liability under § 1983 flowing from violations of an individual's constitutional rights.

Being sued is an occupational hazard in policing.

The police may be liable under:

What type of cases are easier to win than criminal cases, could result in a monetary award, and do not need the intervention of the prosecutor's office to file the case?

Plaintiffs prefer to sue officials in their public (official) capacity because of the "deep pockets" theory.

________ officials, acting in their official capacity, may not be sued under federal law in state court.

The law and case law on police liability are complex and constantly evolving.

Police officers enjoy absolute immunity from ________ when testifying in court, even if the testimony is perjured.

Most lawsuits against the police do succeed.

Every injury caused by police officers leads to municipal liability for failure to train.

Title 42 U.S.C. § 1983 is a federal law that provides an individual the right to sue the government for civil right violations.

Failure to train about workplace hazards could be the basis for a lawsuit as a violation of due process rights, but only if such omission is "arbitrary or conscience-shocking."