Schmidt, Sethi & Akmajian Blog

Torts: Vicarious Liability of County/Ability to Sue Sheriff

Posted by Ted A. Schmidt | Dec 20, 2023 | 0 Comments

Sanchez v. Maricopa County, No. 1 CA-CV 22-0572 (App. Div. I, December 7, 2023) (J. Furuya) https://www.azcourts.gov/Portals/0/OpinionFiles/Div1/2023/1%20CA-CV%2022-0572%20Sanchez,%20et%20al.%20v.%20Maricopa%20County.pdf

COUNTY HAS NO PRINCIPAL-AGENT RELATIONSHIP WITH EMPLOYEES OF SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT AND HAS NO VICARIOUS LIABILITY FOR ACTS OF AN EMPLOYEE OF THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT/SHERIFF IS A “PUBLIC ENTITY” WHICH CAN BE SUED DIRECTLY

Plaintiffs brought a negligence lawsuit pursuant to A.R.S. § 12-821.01 against Maricopa County for injuries they sustained in a car crash with a Maricopa County Deputy Sheriff driving a County vehicle. The trial court dismissed the case pursuant to Arizona Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) finding the County is not vicariously liable for the alleged negligence of a deputy sheriff. Plaintiff appealed claiming the County was liable under the doctrine of respondeat superior and that to hold otherwise would mean they had no remedy because the Sheriff is a nonjural entity that cannot be sued.  The Arizona Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court.

Because the Board of Supervisors for the County does not control the hiring, firing, training, supervision or day to day responsibilities and duties of individual employee/deputies in the Sheriff's Department the County does not have a principal-agent or employer-employee relationship with the individual deputies and therefore is not vicariously liable for their alleged injuries.

The court of appeal further found that the plaintiffs are not without a remedy here as they may sue the Sheriff independent of the County.  The Sheriff qualifies as a “public entity” subject to suit under A.R.S. § 12-820(7). “Constitutional officers—such as sheriffs—are persons fulfilling a public role through service in duly elected governmental offices. Ariz. Const. art. 12, § 3. In other words, they are personal entities who act in a public capacity by virtue of their elected office.”

Finally, A.R.S. §§ 12-821 and -821.01 establish how to pursue a claim through a Notice of Claim against a governmental entity but these statutes do not create a right to sue a particular governmental entity.

About the Author

Ted A. Schmidt

Ted's early career as a trial attorney began on the other side of the fence, in the offices of a major insurance defense firm. It was there that Ted acquired the experience, the skills and the special insight into defense strategy that have served him so well in the field of personal injury law. Notable among his successful verdicts was the landmark Sparks vs. Republic National Life Insurance Company case, a $4.5 million award to Ted's client. To this day, it is the defining case for insurance bad faith, and yet it is only one of several other multi-million dollar jury judgments won by Ted during his career. He is certified by the State Bar of Arizona as a specialist in "wrongful death and bodily injury litigation".

Comments

There are no comments for this post. Be the first and Add your Comment below.

Leave a Comment

Our team works together - for you!

Our award-winning lawyers are backed by a talented, caring team of legal professionals, paralegals, bilingual assistants, notaries, and others - all dedicated to you, your case, and the compensation you deserve.

No fees and no costs until we win.

As such we always have your case and your best interest in mind. When you win, we win too by providing the best legal care possible.

Thorough investigation and preparation.

We tirelessly and thoughtfully prepare every case we represent as though it was going to trial. This lets insurance companies know that we are a force to be reckoned with. As such, we settle successfully 98% of the time.