Larry T. Wilson v. Thomas L. Beebe

Sixth Circuit

Larry T. Wilson v. Thomas L. Beebe

612 F.2d 275

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

DecidedFebruary 4, 1980

Docket77-1725

StatusPublished

Cited by29 cases

This text of 612 F.2d 275 (Larry T. Wilson v. Thomas L. Beebe) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Larry T. Wilson v. Thomas L. Beebe, 612 F.2d 275 (6th Cir. 1980).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff appeals from the dismissal of Counts 2 and 3 of a. complaint charging a State Police officer, Beebe, and two of his superior officers in the Michigan State Police force, with abuse of federal due process rights of plaintiff Wilson when officer Beebe, after apprehending Wilson on a breaking and entering charge, shot him in the lower back in the process of trying to handcuff him with a cocked revolver in his hand. The District Judge to whom. this case was assigned dismissed the counts pertaining to Beebe’s supervisory officers on the ground that the allegations against them did not state a cause of action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1970), and certified the questions presented here as controlling questions of law, while retaining jurisdiction over the § 1983 complaint against State Police Officer Beebe.

The complaint in this case did not allege as to the two State Police officials that they played any personal role in the shooting incident. It does allege that they failed in their supervisory and training functions to prepare Officer Beebe properly for the making of the arrest involved.

It appears that the United States Supreme Court has held that a § 1983 action *276 will not lie against police supervisory officers for failure to prevent police misconduct, absent a showing of direct responsibility for the improper action. Rizzo v. Goode, 423 U.S. 362, 96 S.Ct. 598, 46 L.Ed.2d 561 (1976); Kostka v. Hogg, 560 F.2d 37 (1st Cir. 1977); Scheurer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 94 S.Ct. 1683, 40 L.Ed.2d 90 (1974).

The judgment of the District Court is affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff appeals from the dismissal of Counts 2 and 3 of a. complaint charging a State Police officer, Beebe, and two of his superior officers in the Michigan State Police force, with abuse of federal due process rights of plaintiff Wilson when officer Beebe, after apprehending Wilson on a breaking and entering charge, shot him in the lower back in the process of trying to handcuff him with a cocked revolver in his hand. The District Judge to whom. this case was assigned dismissed the counts pertaining to Beebe’s supervisory officers on the ground that the allegations against them did not state a cause of action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1970), and certified the questions presented here as controlling questions of law, while retaining jurisdiction over the § 1983 complaint against State Police Officer Beebe.

The complaint in this case did not allege as to the two State Police officials that they played any personal role in the shooting incident. It does allege that they failed in their supervisory and training functions to prepare Officer Beebe properly for the making of the arrest involved.

It appears that the United States Supreme Court has held that a § 1983 action *276 will not lie against police supervisory officers for failure to prevent police misconduct, absent a showing of direct responsibility for the improper action. Rizzo v. Goode, 423 U.S. 362, 96 S.Ct. 598, 46 L.Ed.2d 561 (1976); Kostka v. Hogg, 560 F.2d 37 (1st Cir. 1977); Scheurer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 94 S.Ct. 1683, 40 L.Ed.2d 90 (1974).

The judgment of the District Court is affirmed.

Sharon Grandstaff, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of James C. Grandstaff and Kay Lajune Grandstaff, as Next Friend of Jo Cheryl Grandstaff, a Minor, Cross-Appellants v. The City of Borger, Texas, Cross-Appellees. Sharon Grandstaff, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of James C. Grandstaff v. The City of Borger, Texas

767 F.2d 161 (Fifth Circuit, 1985)

Grandstaff v. City of Borger

767 F.2d 161 (Fifth Circuit, 1985)

Miller v. Anderson

594 F. Supp. 640 (N.D. West Virginia, 1984)

Larry T. Wilson, and Cross-Appellant v. Thomas L. Beebe, and Cross-Appellee

743 F.2d 342 (Sixth Circuit, 1984)

Minority Employees v. State, Department of Employment Security

573 F. Supp. 1350 (M.D. Tennessee, 1983)

Stefaniak v. State of Mich.

564 F. Supp. 1194 (W.D. Michigan, 1983)

Edward Lee Dunn v. The State of Tennessee

697 F.2d 121 (Sixth Circuit, 1983)

Melson v. Kroger Co.

550 F. Supp. 1100 (S.D. Ohio, 1982)

Fletcher Altman Smith, and Marguerite Elizabeth Smith v. Don Heath, and Jack Rohtert

691 F.2d 220 (Sixth Circuit, 1982)

Watson v. McGee

527 F. Supp. 234 (S.D. Ohio, 1981)

Smith v. Jordan

527 F. Supp. 167 (S.D. Ohio, 1981)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

612 F.2d 275, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/larry-t-wilson-v-thomas-l-beebe-ca6-1980.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack