Patrick D. Dant v. District of Columbia

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the complex design of its system-wide fare collection apparatus is “approved by WMATA in the exercise of its policy discretion.”
• affirming dismissal of malicious prosecution claim under § 1983 for failure to allege an official policy or custom
• affirming district court’s sua sponte dis- missal of claim based on prosecutorial immunity
• problems that arise due to the faulty maintenance and operation of the fare collection machines are ministerial operations, and thus, immunity is waived by section 80 of the Compact
• sovereign immunity did not bar a tort claim alleging that WMATA negligently operated and maintained its fare card system
• “[T]o survive a motion to dismiss, a complaint asserting a § 1983 claim must allege a predicate constitutional violation which was caused by a policy of the District of Columbia.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).