Suing the city: Monell
A city is a person under Section 1983 and can be sued. But it is not liable simply because its officer violated the Constitution. Under Monell, a municipality answers only for its own policy or custom, including a failure to train that amounts to deliberate indifference, and the complaint has to plead that from the start. That is the hardest route to the City. The easy routes are state law, through the notice of claim, and for NYPD officers the City's own 2021 law, which names the employer directly. This page goes through all three and explains why the City pays in the cases it does.
Current as of September 2026. We re-check this page every quarter and after any change in the law.
People who were hurt by a police officer want to sue the police department, and the instinct is right: the department has the money, the records and the policies. The federal law makes that harder than it sounds. The department is not a separate defendant, the City is, and the City is liable under Section 1983 only for what the City itself did, not for what its officer did. This page explains the rule, the three ways of satisfying it, what a complaint has to say to survive a motion to dismiss in the Second Circuit, and the two other routes, state law and the City's own 2021 law, that reach the City without any of it. The law page sets it beside the other questions.
The rule
In Monell v. Department of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658 (1978), the Supreme Court held two things. Municipalities are "persons" under Section 1983 and can be sued. And there is no respondeat superior liability: a city is not liable simply because it employs the person who violated the Constitution. A municipality is liable only where an official policy or custom causes the violation. The policy has to be the City's, and it has to be what caused the violation the plaintiff suffered.
The rule has been the same for nearly fifty years and it shapes every police abuse case against New York City. The individual officers are sued for what they did. The City is sued, under the federal statute, for a policy, a custom or a training failure that caused them to do it. If the plaintiff cannot plead and prove that, the federal claim against the City is dismissed and the federal case goes forward against the officers alone.
The three routes
An official policy
The plainest route is a written policy that itself caused the violation. A patrol guide provision that directs officers to do something unconstitutional, or a commissioner's order, is a policy. These cases are rare, because departments do not usually write down instructions to violate the Constitution.
A custom
The second route is a practice that is not written down but that the department follows, and tolerates, as if it were policy. The Second Circuit has stated the pleading elements as "(1) an official policy or custom that (2) causes the plaintiff to be subjected to (3) a denial of a constitutional right" (Lucente v. County of Suffolk, 980 F.3d 284, 297 (2d Cir. 2020)). The custom has to be shown by more than the plaintiff's own case. In Jones v. Town of East Haven, 691 F.3d 72 (2d Cir. 2012), the court held that isolated acts of excessive force by non-policymaking employees are generally not enough to show a custom. What is needed is a pattern: other incidents, complaints, findings, or the department's own records showing that the conduct was common and tolerated.
A failure to train
The third route is the one most often pleaded and most often dismissed. In City of Canton v. Harris, 489 U.S. 378 (1989), the Supreme Court held that a failure to train is actionable only where it "amounts to deliberate indifference to the constitutional rights of persons with whom the police come into contact." That is a high bar, and the Court raised it further in Connick v. Thompson, 563 U.S. 51 (2011): a single violation cannot ordinarily support failure-to-train liability, and "a pattern of similar constitutional violations by untrained employees is ordinarily necessary" to show that the City was deliberately indifferent. A plaintiff who says the officer was badly trained has not pleaded a Monell claim. A plaintiff who can point to a series of similar violations that the City knew about and did not train against may have.
Where the pattern comes from
A Monell claim is built from records that exist outside the plaintiff's own case: the officers' disciplinary histories, CCRB findings, other lawsuits, and the department's own reports. Since the repeal of Civil Rights Law 50-a in 2020, police disciplinary records are subject to FOIL. The disciplinary records page explains the request, and the CCRB page explains what the Board's findings are and are not.
What the complaint has to say
The Monell claim is tested at the first motion, before any discovery. A complaint that names the City and recites that it "failed to train, supervise and discipline" its officers, with nothing more, is routinely dismissed. Under the Second Circuit's formulation the complaint has to allege facts showing the policy or custom, facts showing that it caused what happened to the plaintiff, and the constitutional violation itself (Lucente, 980 F.3d at 297). In a custom or training case that means pleading the pattern: the prior incidents, the complaints, the findings, with enough specificity that the court can see why the City should have known. The filing page explains how the complaint is built and what happens after it is filed.
Our pin cites to Lucente and Jones are drawn from case listings rather than the reporters and are marked for re-verification before this site launches. The holdings are stated as the ledger records them.
No punitive damages against the City
Even where a Monell claim succeeds, the damages are limited. In City of Newport v. Fact Concerts, 453 U.S. 247 (1981), the Supreme Court held that a municipality is immune from punitive damages under Section 1983. Individual officers are not. Compensatory damages, nominal damages and attorney's fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988(b) are available against the City on a successful Monell claim; punitive damages are available only against the officers. The damages and fees page goes through each.
| Route | What has to be shown | Notice required | Clock | Immunity defense |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Section 1983, Monell | An official policy or custom, or deliberately indifferent training, that caused the violation | None (Felder v. Casey) | 3 years (CPLR 214(5)) | Not for the City; qualified immunity for the officers |
| New York state law | The wrongful act of the City's employee, as a state-law tort | Notice of claim within 90 days (Gen. Mun. Law § 50-e) | 1 year and 90 days (§ 50-i) | Not published here |
| N.Y.C. Admin. Code ch. 8 (NYPD only) | An unreasonable search, seizure or force by a covered individual; the employer is liable | Not expressly required by the statute; we serve one anyway | 3 years (§ 8-806) | None (§ 8-804) |
The routes that skip Monell
State law: the City as employer
New York law does not have a Monell rule. General Municipal Law § 50-i(1) governs an action against a city, county, town or village for personal injury "caused by the negligence or wrongful act" of the municipality or its employees, and it is a direct claim against the City for what its employee did. The price is the notice of claim: it must be served within 90 days after the claim arises (§ 50-e(1)(a)), on the Comptroller for the City of New York, and suit must be commenced within one year and 90 days of the event (§ 50-i(1)). No notice is required for the federal claim (Felder v. Casey, 487 U.S. 131 (1988)), but the federal claim reaches the City only through Monell. That is the trade. The notice of claim page goes through the rule and the state-law claims page goes through the claims.
The City's 2021 law: the employer named directly
For NYPD employees and special patrolmen, the City's civil rights law of 2021 goes further. A civil action for an unreasonable search or seizure or for excessive force lies against the covered individual "and the employer," including for a failure to intervene, and exhaustion of administrative remedies is not required (N.Y.C. Admin. Code § 8-803). No policy, custom or training failure has to be pleaded. The limitation period is three years (§ 8-806) and qualified immunity is not a defense (§ 8-804). The chapter reaches only NYPD employees and special patrolmen, not the Department of Correction, other municipalities or the State. The city law page has the rest.
The direct routes have the short clock
The state-law claim against the City is lost if the notice is not served within 90 days, unless a court grants leave before the one-year-and-90-day period runs (§ 50-e(5)). The Monell claim has three years and no notice, but it has to be proved with a pattern. Serving the notice in the first 90 days keeps the easy route open while the hard one is investigated.
Why the City still pays
Given how hard Monell is, a reader could conclude that the City rarely pays in police cases. The public figures say otherwise. According to an analysis by the Legal Aid Society of New York City Law Department data, released March 2, 2026, the City paid out in 1,044 NYPD misconduct lawsuits disposed of in 2025, for a total of $117,251,230.82, and in 6,766 such lawsuits from 2019 through 2025, for a total of $796,213,846.51. Those figures are public statistics about other people's cases, compiled from public data with the Legal Aid Society as the source; they exclude claims settled by the Comptroller before a lawsuit was filed, and they are not a prediction about any case. The by the numbers page has the year-by-year table.
The reason those payouts happen despite Monell is that most cases against the City are not only Monell cases. They carry the state-law claims, on which the City answers for its employee directly; for NYPD conduct since 2021, the City-law claim, on which the employer is named; and the federal claims against the individual officers. The rules under which the City pays a settlement or a judgment entered against an individual officer are not published on this site, because they are not in our verified ledger; what is published is that the City paid, and how much, by year, from the public record.
New Jersey and Florida
The Monell rule is the same federal rule in every state. What differs is the state-law route around it. In New Jersey a tort claim against a public entity requires a Tort Claims Act notice within 90 days (N.J.S.A. 59:8-8), while a claim under the New Jersey Civil Rights Act needs no notice (Owens v. Feigin, 194 N.J. 607 (2008)). In Florida a claim against a city, county or state agency requires written notice within three years and is subject to the statutory caps of $200,000 per person and $300,000 per incident, with no punitive damages against the government (Fla. Stat. § 768.28(5)(a), (6)). The New Jersey and Florida pages go through each.
If a charge is pending
A Monell claim is built from the department's records, not from your statement. If a charge from the same incident is pending, talk to your defense lawyer before describing the arrest to anyone; the criminal case and civil case page explains why.
The 90-day notice of claim
The direct route to the City under state law: what goes in the notice, where it goes, the 50-h examination, and late notice.
Notice of claim →The New York City law of 2021
The employer named directly, no immunity defense, three years, and who it does not cover.
The city law →By the numbers
What New York City paid in police misconduct cases, 2019 to 2025, and what the CCRB received and substantiated. Public figures, cited.
The numbers →Common questions
If the officer is liable, isn't the City automatically liable too?
Not under Section 1983. Monell v. Department of Social Services rejected respondeat superior, the rule that an employer answers for its employee's acts. A municipality is liable under the federal statute only where an official policy or custom caused the violation. Under New York state law the answer is different: a claim against the City for the wrongful act of its employee is brought directly, after a notice of claim within 90 days. That is the main reason the state-law claims matter.
What counts as a policy or custom?
A written policy, a practice that is not written down but that the department follows as if it were policy, or a failure to train that amounts to deliberate indifference to the constitutional rights of the people the police deal with. In the Second Circuit, isolated acts of excessive force by officers who are not policymakers are generally not enough to show a custom. The complaint has to plead the policy, the causal link and the violation.
Can I get punitive damages from the City?
No. The Supreme Court held in City of Newport v. Fact Concerts that a municipality is immune from punitive damages under Section 1983. Individual officers are not immune from them. Under Florida law, no punitive damages are available against the State or its subdivisions either. The damages and fees page goes through each.
Why does the City settle cases if Monell is so hard?
Because most cases against the City are not only Monell cases. They carry state-law claims against the City as employer, City-law claims for NYPD conduct, and federal claims against the individual officers. Public figures compiled by the Legal Aid Society from Law Department data show that New York City paid out in 1,044 NYPD misconduct lawsuits disposed of in 2025. Those are public statistics about other people's cases, not a prediction about yours.
Tell us what happened.
One conversation with an attorney, in your language. We tell you which claims the facts support, which deadline runs first for the agency involved, what evidence to preserve this week, and whether a pending criminal case changes the timing. If it is not a case we can take, we say so and tell you where to go.
(718) 484-7510If a criminal charge is still open, talk to your defense lawyer before you describe the arrest to anyone, including us. English, Russian and Spanish in-house; an interpreter for any other language. Contingency fee, confirmed in writing before we begin.