Amicus Brief

Wayne County et al v Richko

Case Year: 2016
Case Forum: United States Supreme Court
Keywords: qualified immunity, liability, "clearly established" duty, jail
Amicus Counsel:

Mary Massaron | Hilary A. Ballentine | Plunkett Cooney | 38505 Woodward Avenue Suite 2000 | Bloomfield Hills MI 48304 | 248- 901-4000

CoAmicus Parties:

Michigan Municipal League Liability & Property Pool (Pool)


Amici have a longstanding interest in the proper development of the law of qualified immunity, particularly as it relates to state
and local municipalities and their employees involved in the high-risk and difficult task of dealing with prisoners in jail facilities. Individuals working in local jail facilities, such as those working in the local county jail at issue here, are not mental health experts trained at predicting an individual’s propensity for violence, predictions that even trained mental health
professionals are often unable to accurately make. In addition, many local governments currently lack sufficient jail cells or funds to expand their jails to provide single cells for large proportions of current inmates. A rule essentially requiring this approach would be unfeasible for many local governments due to the lack of cells and the cost. Amici’s brief attempts to shed light on the practical considerations and potential difficulties that flow from the current published decision and to offer an analysis of qualified immunity and the duties of jailors that may shed light on the context within which the issues arise..

MSC requested LDF amicus brief? No
Case Number: 2015-20
©2022 Michigan Municipal League LLC. All rights reserved