Randy Mulholland v. Government County of Berks

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a municipality “can be held responsible as an entity when the injury inflicted is permitted under its adopted policy or custom.”
• holding that a municipality “can be held responsible as an entity when the injury inflicted is permitted under its adopted policy or custom.”
• holding that even if a county agency’s child abuse investigation was inadequate, the parents’ § 1983 claim failed where there was no evidence that the agency “employ[ed] a policy or ha[d] a custom of conducting desultory investigations”
• noting that a welfare agency must “‘consciously disregard[] a great risk that there had been no abuse’”
• explaining that to state a substantive due process claim, a plaintiff must allege facts raising the inference that defendants’ actions were so arbitrary, ill-conceived or malicious as to shock the conscience
• explaining that policies occur when a decisionmaker with final authority “issues an official proclamation, policy or edict” and customs exist only when practices are “so permanent and well-settled as to virtually constitute law.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).