Cluster 166314

“The final policymaker must not only approve the decision, but also adopt the basis for the decision, and the ratification must be the moving force, or cause, of the alleged constitutional violation.” Dempsey v. City of Baldwin, 143 F. App'x 976, 986 (10th Cir. 2005) (citing Paprotnik, 480 U.S. at 127, 107 S.Ct. 1038 ).

Once Plaintiff has established that such a choice was made, she “must show that the municipal action was taken with the requisite degree of culpability and must demonstrate a direct causal link between the municipal action and 11 “Authority to make municipal policy may be granted directly by a legislative enactment or may be delegated by an official who possesses such authority . . . .” Pembaur, 475 U.S. at 483 . 12 “To determine the identity of the final policymaker, we con…

“The final policymaker must not only approve the decision, but also adopt the basis for the decision, and the ratification must be the moving force, or cause, of the alleged constitutional violation.” Dempsey v. City of Baldwin, 143 Fed.

Under a § 1983 theory of ratification, “[t]he final policymaker must not only approve the decision, but also adopt the basis for the decision, and the ratification must be the moving force, or cause, of the alleged constitutional violation.” Dempsey v. City of Baldwin, 143 Fed.Appx. 976, 986 (10th Cir.2005) (citing Praprotnik, 485 U.S. at 127 , 108 S.Ct. 915 ).

See Dempsey v. City of Baldwin, 143 F. App’x 976, 986 (10th Cir. 2005) (“[T]he ratification must be the moving force, or cause, of the alleged constitutional violation.” (citation omitted)); see also Bryson, 627 F.3d at 790 (concluding that ratification theory was not viable where a city “was not even aware of [a police department employee’s] unconstitutional actions with respect to [p]laintiff” and “no [city] decisionmakers learned of any defects” in plaintiff’s case until …

See Dempsey v. City of Baldwin, 143 F. App’x 976, 986 (10th Cir. 2005) (“[T]he ratification must be the moving force, or cause, of the alleged constitutional violation.” (citation omitted)); see also Bryson, 627 F.3d at 790 (concluding that ratification theory was not viable where a city “was not even aware of [a police department employee’s] unconstitutional actions with respect to [p]laintiff” and “no [city] decisionmakers learned of any defects” in plaintiff’s case until …

See Dempsey v. City of Baldwin, 143 Fed.Appx. 976, 986 (10th Cir.2005)(ratification must be the cause of the alleged violation); Riggs v. City of Wichita, 2011 WL 2970828 *6 (D.Kan.7/21/2011)(citing Dempsey and other cases for the same rule).

Colo. 2002)); see also Dempsey v. City of Baldwin, 143 F. App’x 976, 987-90 (10th Cir. 2005) (analyzing whether city council or mayor had final authority over personnel issues after plaintiff alleged municipal liability for unconstitutional termination by mayor).