King v. The City of Crestwood, No. 16-4560 (8th Cir. 2018)
Annotate this CaseThe Eighth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal of plaintiff's 42 U.S.C. 1983 action against the City and a municipal judge, seeking costs and attorney's fees after plaintiff successfully defended himself in municipal court against a charge that he violated an ordinance for disorderly conduct. The court affirmed the district court's holding that no municipal liability under section 1983 was present in this case because the municipal court's ruling did not constitute a final municipal policy decision. The court also held that the judge was not a policymaker, and thus relief under section 1983 was foreclosed.
Court Description: Smith, Author, with Arnold and Kelly, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Civil rights. In action alleging defendants violated plaintiff's civil rights by not awarding him attorneys' fees under Mo. Rev. Stat. Sec. 563.074 after he was acquitted of violating the city's ordinance on disorderly conduct, the district court correctly held that no municipal liability under Section 1983 was present because the municipal court judge's ruling did not constitute a final municipal policy decision as it was subject to review or reversal by higher state courts; the defendant judge was not a policy maker, and relief under Section 1983 is foreclosed.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.