Soltesz v. Rushmore Plaza Civic Center, No. 15-3264 (8th Cir. 2017)
Annotate this CasePlaintiff filed suit against the Civic Center and the City after his lease for a concession stand was terminated and his property was seized. Plaintiff alleged municipal liability based on the decision of the policymaker. The court explained that the district court must identify the final policymaker in accordance with South Dakota state law and local Rapid City ordinances. Because the district court failed to do so in this case, the jury rendered a verdict against defendants that lacked a legally sufficient basis. Therefore, the court reversed the district court's ruling on the Civic Center's renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law, vacated the jury's verdict, and remanded for a new trial.
Court Description: Shepherd, Author, with Murphy and Gruender, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Civil rights. In suit alleging municipal liability premised on the decision of a final policymaker, the district court failed to identify the final policymaker as a matter of state law and local city ordinances as required by Supreme Court case law, and the matter is remanded to the district court for a new trial; no legally sufficient evidentiary basis exists to impose liability on a municipality for the decisions of a final policymaker when the district court fails to identify the policymaker as a matter of law before the claims reach the jury.
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.