Ford v. Byrd, 76-2644
| Decision Date | 16 December 1976 |
| Docket Number | No. 76-2644,76-2644 |
| Citation | 544 F.2d 194 |
| Parties | Robert Charles FORD, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Donald BYRD, Chief of Police, et al., Defendants-Appellees. Summary Calendar. * |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit |
Robert Charles Ford, pro se.
John L. Hill, Atty. Gen., Thomas W. Choate, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., David M. Kendall Jr., First Asst. Atty., Austin, Tex., for defendants-appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas.
Before AINSWORTH, GODBOLD and RONEY, Circuit Judges.
This is a § 1983 suit by a Texas state prisoner. The District Court dismissed it without prejudice to the filing of a habeas corpus petition.
Insofar as plaintiff seeks relief from confinement he must proceed by habeas corpus. The prosecuting attorney 1 and the state trial judge who sentenced plaintiff are immune from § 1983 suits.
Plaintiff questions the validity of the search of his car by two police officers. That issue was decided adversely to plaintiff by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. We pretermit whether that holding collaterally estops the plaintiff in the present case. 2 The officers who conducted the search are not named as parties. The chief of police is named, but he is vicariously liable for the acts of his subordinates only if he directs, orders, participates in, or approves the acts. There is no claim he did so in this case.
AFFIRMED.
* Rule 18, 5 Cir.; see Isbell Enterprises, Inc. v. Citizens Casualty Co. of New York et al., 5 Cir., 1970, 431 F.2d 409, Part I.
1 The prosecuting attorney was not named as a defendant but was mentioned in the other papers filed by plaintiff as being a defendant. Out of caution, the habeas judge ruled as though the prosecuting attorney were a defendant.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Taylor By and Through Walker v. Ledbetter
... ... Ford v. Byrd, 544 F.2d 194, 195 (5th Cir.1976) (per curiam) (affirming dismissal of section 1983 suit in ... ...
-
Craig v. Carson
...connection between a defendant and the conduct that deprived a plaintiff of his constitutionally guaranteed rights. Ford v. Byrd, 544 F.2d 194, 195 (5th Cir. 1976); Sims v. Adams, 537 F.2d 829, 831 (5th Cir. 1976); Palmer v. Hall, 517 F.2d 705, 708 (5th Cir. 1975); Chestnut v. Quincy, Fla.,......
-
Doe v. Taylor Independent School Dist.
...supervisor's] liability under Sec. 1983," id., 621 F.2d at 680, was also expressly based on Rizzo. Similarly we stated in Ford v. Byrd, 544 F.2d 194, 195 (5th Cir.1976), that a police chief is "liable for the acts of his subordinates only if he directs, orders, participates in, or approves ......
-
Leite v. City of Providence
...in the alleged misconduct. Delaney v. Dias, 415 F.Supp. 1351, 1353 (D.Mass.1976); see cases cited therein. See also Ford v. Byrd, 544 F.2d 194 (5th Cir. 1976); Parker v. McKeithen, supra. But see Carter v. Carlson, 144 U.S.App.D.C. 388, 447 F.2d 358 (1971), rev'd on other grounds sub nom. D......
-
Ratification as an Exception to the Section 1983 Causation Requirement: Plaintiff's Opportunity or Illusion?
...See Williams v. Bennett, 689 F.2d 1370, 1380 (11th Cir. 1982). 52. 602 F.2d 1205 (5th Cir. 1979). 53. Id. at 1208. 54. Ford v. Byrd, 544 F.2d 194, 195 (5th Cir. 1976); see also Fogarty v. Gallegos, 523 F.3d 1147, 1163-64 (10th Cir. 2008) (finding liability under § 1983 for a police chief wh......