USCA1 Opinion

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT

No. 96-1923

HENRY C. SEEKAMP, JR.,

Plaintiff, Appellant,

v.

RONALD MICHAUD, et al.,

Defendants, Appellees.

____________________

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF MAINE

[Hon. Gene Carter, U.S. District Judge]

___________________

____________________

Before

Cyr, Circuit Judge,

_____________

Coffin, Senior Circuit Judge,

____________________

and Lynch, Circuit Judge.

_____________

____________________

Michael J. Waxman for appellant.

_________________
Leanne Robbin, Assistant
______________
Ketterer,

Attorney General,

Attorney
and Peter

General,
J. Brann,

with

whom

And
___

Assistant Attor

________

_______________

General, were on brief for appellees.

____________________

March 26, 1997

____________________

CYR, Circuit Judge.

CYR, Circuit Judge.
______________

Appellant Henry

C. Seekamp, Jr.,

challenges a summary judgment ruling disallowing his civil rights

claims against

various Maine

their supervisor, based on

stemming from

State Police ("MSP")

an alleged Fourth Amendment violation

a roadblock established by

on the Maine Turnpike.

officers and

the defendant officers

We affirm the district court judgment.

I
I

BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
__________

The material facts are not in dispute.

ly 1:00 a.m.

on July 14, 1994,

dence in Scarborough, Maine, for

Seekamp left his

At approximate-

parents' resi-

the asserted purpose of picking

up the pieces of his former life in Arkansas, where his relation-

ship with a girlfriend

and his career in

the United States

Air

Force

were abruptly ended

by an

automobile accident

in April,

1993, which left him with a brain injury.

As

zone on

miles

Seekamp was

Route 1, his

per hour

After Seekamp

pursuit.

police

Chevrolet Monte

by Scarborough

through a

Carlo was

50 m.p.h.

clocked at

63

Police Sergeant

Eugene O'Neill.

failed to heed Sergeant O'Neill's

signal to stop,

O'Neill followed

the

proceeding south

him into Saco

where local police

Undeterred, Seekamp not

vehicles but drove through

units joined

only ignored the pursuing

the Maine Turnpike toll plaza

at Saco, and onto a southbound lane, without stopping.

Alerted by Sergeant

O'Neill, the

responsibility for the pursuit after learning

the Monte

Carlo had eluded

a police officer

MSP assumed

further

that the driver of

a felony

under

Maine law.

(repealed

See
___

Ann., tit. 29-A,

and replaced on January 1, 1995

codified as Me.

Situated

Me. Rev. Stat.

farther

Rev. Stat.

south near

(1994)

by P.L. 1995, Ch. 65,

Ann. tit. 29-A,

the

2501-A

Biddeford

2414(3)

(1996)).

exit, MSP

Trooper

Ronald Michaud took up the pursuit at approximately 1:35 a.m.

In

an effort to force Seekamp to a stop, Trooper Michaud attempted a

"rolling roadblock" by driving

decelerating

abandoned

to force

the

in front of the Monte

Seekamp to

rolling

slow as

roadblock when

well.

Seekamp

Carlo then

Michaud soon

responded

with

reckless attempts to get around the police cruiser.

At approximately 1:45 a.m., Trooper Michaud

radio dispatch

that

to the effect

that Seekamp's father

received a

had advised

his brain-injured son was operating the Monte Carlo but was

unarmed and neither suicidal nor

or drugs.

under the influence of

alcohol

Trooper Michaud considered the information both stale

and unverifiable because Seekamp, Sr., could

not have known what

happened to his son after leaving the family home some 45 minutes

earlier.

Meanwhile,

MSP Sergeant

Steven

Beal and

MSP Trooper

Thomas Arnold had

joined the

pursuit north of

the Wells

During this phase, Seekamp continued his erratic driving

clocked by Trooper

Michaud at speeds

About

the same time and

geant

Beal directed

MSP

up to

97 miles per

at Trooper Michaud's

Trooper Larry

exit.

and was

hour.

request, MSP Ser-

McAfee

to establish

roadblock north of the York toll plaza.

The roadblock

was set up approximately

800 feet north

of the York

toll plaza, at the end

of a 1500-foot straightaway.

First, Trooper McAfee commandeered a flatbed tractor-trailer unit

loaded with lumber sheathed in white plastic and directed that it

be

parked across the three southbound travel lanes, with its cab

at

the

guardrail.

extended

almost

Once in

entirely across

McAfee completed the blocking

parking his

unit, with

place,

police cruiser

the

the

tractor-trailer unit

southbound travel

of the southbound travel

at the rear

its headlights pointing

of the

north in the

lanes.

lanes by

tractor-trailer

direction from

which Seekamp would be approaching.

After turning on the cruiser's headlights, blue lights,

and

flashers, McAfee

directed

other tractor-trailers

to

park

along the breakdown lane parallel to the blocked travel lanes.

fifty-foot gap was left between two of

parked in

proceed

speed,

the breakdown

lane, to

the tractor-trailer units

permit

vehicular traffic

to

onto the breakdown lane and around the roadblock at slow

with police assistance.

The headlights

of the tractor-

trailer unit at the northern end of the fifty-foot gap illuminat-

ed the avenue of vehicular egress along the breakdown lane.

The entire roadblock

area was brightly

illuminated by

overhead street lights, the lights from Trooper McAfee's cruiser,

and the

the

headlights of the commandeered

southbound travel lanes.

tractor-trailer blocking

In addition, upon

arrival at the

roadblock site to assist Trooper McAfee, MSP Trooper Kevin Curran

parked

his cruiser in a southbound travel lane with its flashers

on and its headlights directed at the roadblock as well.

What with the bright white plastic sheathing around the

lumber on the tractor-trailer unit blocking the southbound travel

lanes,

the roadblock

area was

visible from

approximately 1500

feet along the straightaway approaching the York toll plaza.1

the

Monte Carlo approached

several

the roadblock, it

times yet failed to come

As

appeared to brake

to a complete stop even though

the

pursuing police cruisers had slowed to allow Seekamp room to

maneuver.

Ultimately,

tractor-trailer unit

causing

Seekamp

it collided

with the

rear axle

parked across the southbound

a hairline

fracture of

the

of the

travel lanes,

hip and

a severe

facial laceration.

Seekamp brought suit under 42 U.S.C.

1983 against the

subordinate MSP defendants, alleging Fourth Amendment violations;

and

against

MSP

provide adequate

awarded

Chief

Alfred Skofield,

training and

summary judgment

supervision.

to all

Jr.,

The

defendants on

for

failure to

district court

the alternative

grounds that the roadblock was reasonable and all defendants were

entitled

to qualified immunity.

23, 28-30 (D. Me. 1996).

Seekamp v. Michaud, 936 F. Supp

_______
_______

____________________

1Defendants

produced

expert who attested that

per hour can
there was

come to

the

uncontroverted affidavit

a motor vehicle traveling at

a stop within

ample room for Seekamp

400 feet.

full stop without contacting the roadblock.

tion that

that

Carlo to a

Moreover, the record

reflects that Seekamp did slow to between 35 and 50

approached the roadblock.

an

100 miles

He opined

to bring the Monte

of

m.p.h. as he

Finally, Seekamp testified at deposi-

he could have stopped the Monte Carlo but for the fact

that its brakes were not functioning properly.

II
II

DISCUSSION2
DISCUSSION
__________

1.
1.

Subordinate MSP Defendants

Subordinate MSP Defendants
__________________________

Seekamp

claims the subordinate MSP defendants violated

his Fourth Amendment right to be free

of his person.

Since Seekamp acknowledges probable cause

warrantless arrest, we need

effected

from unreasonable seizures

for a

only determine whether the roadblock

a Fourth Amendment seizure

and, if so,

whether it was

reasonable.3

A.
A.

Did the Roadblock Effect a Fourth Amendment Seizure?

Did the Roadblock Effect a Fourth Amendment Seizure?
____________________________________________________

The

defendants

contend

that

the

roadblock did

not

constitute

vehicular

Fourth

traffic

designedly left

Amendment

to maneuver

seizure

because

through

between two of the

it

permitted

the fifty-foot

opening

tractor-trailer units parked

in the breakdown lane to the right of the westernmost, southbound

____________________

2We review a grant of summary judgment

de novo.
__ ____

Alvarado, 101 F.3d 223, 227 (1st Cir. 1996).

________
will

be

affirmed if

"the

pleadings,

interrogatories, and

the admissions

affidavits,

show

material

if any,

Sanchez v.
_______

The district court

depositions, answers

on file, together

that there

is

no genuine

to

with the
issue

of

fact, and that the moving party is entitled to judgment

as a matter of law."

Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c).

3As eluding a police officer is a felony, see Me. Rev. Stat.

___
Ann. tit.
doing

29-A,

so, see
___

2501-A (1994),
supra at
_____

warrantless arrest.

See
___

p. 2,

pect]

committed [a]

had been

observed

probable cause

for a

v. Sepulveda, 102
_________

F.3d

("[P]robable cause requires only that

police have 'reasonable

had

there was

United States
_____________

1313, 1316 (1st Cir. 1996)

the

and Seekamp

grounds to believe'

crime."); see

also

that [the sus-

Joyce v.

Town of

Tewksbury,
_________

104

warrantless
stances

507,

arrest based

____

_____

_______

510-11 (1st

Cir.

1997)

(upholding

on probable

such as pursuit of

tit. 17-A,
arrest

F.3d

___

cause in

exigent circum-

fleeing felon); Me.

Rev. Stat. Ann.

15 (A)(3) (West Supp. 1996)

(permitting warrantless

by police officer with probable cause to believe arrestee

committed or is committing Class C crime).

travel lane.

We do not agree.4

Almost a

decade ago,

vehicular collision involving

the Supreme

Court dealt

with a

a so-called "deadman's roadblock,"

designed and

constructed

to

block off

an

entire

roadway

by

placing an unilluminated tractor-trailer unit just beyond a curve

and

locating a police cruiser directly in front of the roadblock

with its headlights aimed at the oncoming target vehicle, thereby

blinding the

around the

(1989).

driver to

curve.

the impassable highway

Brower
______

v. Inyo County, 489

____________

Brower nevertheless enunciates a rule

______

egregious facts largely immaterial

obstruction just

U.S. 593,

594

that renders its

to the required Fourth Amend-

ment inquiry into whether a roadblock "seizure" has occurred.

Writing for the Court,

Justice Scalia explained that a

Fourth Amendment seizure occurs "only when there

is a governmen-

tal termination of freedom of movement through means intentional_______ _____ ____________

ly
__

applied," id. at 597;

_______
__

906 F.2d 791,

[is] enough

795 (1st

see also Landol-Rivera

___ ____ _____________

Cir. 1990) (same),

for a seizure that

instrumentality set in

v. Cruz Cosme,
__________

explaining that

a person be stopped

motion or

put in place

"it

by the very

to achieve

that

____________________

4We note that

the

doctrine

a great many

of

qualified

Somerset County,
________________

53 F.3d

denied, 116 S. Ct. 675

______
tutional

merit.

Our

immunity,
1367,

tuted

a seizure),

view

to

1379, 1381

most recent decision

was such

a case.

(1st

Hegarty
_______

v.

Cir.), cert.
____

involving an alleged

modicum

of

warranted in our earlier cases.

(1st Cir.

partial roadblock
With

merits in some
concrete

consti-

that constitutional

the case now before us,

to discuss the

affording a

e.g.,
____

Sullivan, 4 F.3d 2, 15
________

consider whether

issue squarely presented in

take the occasion

see,
___

(1995), without considering their consti-

seizure by roadblock, Horta v.

_____
1993) (declining to

1983 claims are resolved under

however, we

detail with

guidance not

often

result."

Brower, 489 U.S. at 599.

______

The majority

opinion went on

to say:

[A] roadblock is not just

of authority

to induce a voluntary stop, but

it is designed to
impact if
cur.

produce a stop by physical

voluntary compliance does

It may

well

be that

preferred, and indeed

Brower

a significant show

not oc-

respondents here

earnestly hoped,

that

would stop on his own, without strik-

ing the barrier, but we do not think it practicable to

conduct such an inquiry into sub-

jective intent.

Nor do we think it possible,

in determining whether there

zure in

a case such as

between a roadblock that

has been a sei-

this, to distinguish
is designed to give

the oncoming driver the option of a voluntary

stop

(e.g., one
____

at the

end of

a straight-

away), and

a roadblock that is designed pre-

cisely

produce

to

collision

(e.g., one
____

located just around a bend).

Id. at 598 (citations omitted).

__

Thus, for purposes of determining whether the roadblock

in

this case worked a Fourth Amendment seizure under Brower, the

______

controlling consideration is not

nated, located at the

restrictive

whether it was brightly illumi-

end of a long straightaway, or

avenue of egress.5

afforded a

Rather, it constituted a Fourth

Amendment seizure because Seekamp "was meant to be stopped by the

physical

obstacle of

the

roadblock

and

. .

he was

so

stopped."

Id. at 599.6
__

____________________

5The district court found that "[t]he escape route consisted

of
ing

making a 90-degree turn into a corridor []invisible to oncomtraffic."

though the
50 feet

Seekamp, 936
_______

entrance to the invisible

wide, it

was necessary

approaching vehicles.

6The dictum in
that

F. Supp.

Id.
___

from where

n.5.

point it

out to

These findings are not in dispute.

Horta v. Sullivan, 4 F.3d at

_____
________

the

Thus, even

corridor was approximately

for McAfee to

the illuminated blocking of

distance

at 28

a single lane

block could

be

15 ("It may be

at a point some

seen by

the

pursued

The Brower
______

Amendment

seizure

governmental

standard for

has occurred

termination

intentionally applied."

for

example,

if the

determining whether

applies

of freedom

of movement

Id. at 597
__

MSP troopers

whenever

a Fourth

"there is

through means

(emphasis omitted).

had

resorted to

Thus,

some other

method, such as the use of spike mats, a Fourth Amendment seizure

would have occurred

provided Seekamp

instrumentality set in

result."

("It

is

Id. at 599.
__

motion or

was "stopped

put in place

by the

very

to achieve

that

See also Landol-Rivera, 906

___ ____ _____________

intervention directed

at

F.2d at 796

specific individual

furnishes the basis for a Fourth Amendment claim.").

that

B.
B.

Did the Roadblock Effect an Unreasonable Seizure?

Did the Roadblock Effect an Unreasonable Seizure?
________________________________________________

We determine the "reasonableness" of a Fourth Amendment

seizure by balancing "'the nature and quality of the intrusion on

the individual's Fourth Amendment interests' against the counter-

vailing governmental interests at stake."

Graham v. Connor, 490

______
______

U.S. 386, 396 (1989) (quoting Tennessee v. Garner, 471

_________
______

(1985)).

The

careful attention

McCabe
______

Fourth

Amendment

to the

reasonableness test

circumstances in the

U.S. 1, 8

requires

particular case.

v. Life-Line Ambulance Serv., Inc., 77 F.3d 540, 546 (1st

_______________________________

Cir.), cert. denied,

____ ______

excessive

force claim

____________________

117 S. Ct. 275 (1996).

must demonstrate

Moreover, "a viable

that the

police defen-

vehicle would not amount to a seizure."), relied on by appellees,

not only

describes a

prefaced

by the explicit observation that the court did not need

to

distinctively different roadblock,

decide whether "this partial roadblock

under

the

Fourth

Amendment[,]"

entitled to qualified immunity.

id.,
___

but is

amounted to a seizure

because

defendants were

Id. at 9, 11-15.
___

dant['s] actions were not objectively reasonable, viewed in light

of the facts and circumstances confronting him and without regard

to his

underlying intent or

motivation."

Alexis
______

Restaurants of Massachusetts, Inc., 67 F.3d

___________________________________

1995).

the force used

to effect a

threat to

whether the

that the

the officers

suspect was, inter alia,

_____ ____

evade arrest

67 F.3d at 352-53.

district court

could have found this

reasonable:

(2) whether there was "an immedi-

the safety of

attempting to

Alexis,
______

Cir.

factors for evaluating whether

seizure was objectively

(1) the severity of the crime,

or

341, 352 (1st

See also Graham, 490 U.S. at 397.

___ ____ ______

Graham identifies three

______

ate

v. McDonald's
__________

or others";

and (3)

"actively resisting arrest

by flight."

Under these

correctly ruled

Id.
__

at 396.

See
___

standards, we conclude

that no rational

jury

roadblock unreasonable in the circumstanc-

es.

See Seekamp, 936 F. Supp. at 28.

___ _______

Seekamp contends that

manner likely to kill him.

the roadblock

was set

See Brower, 489 U.S. at

___ ______

up in

599 (noting

that the potential for recovery by Brower arose "only because the

unreasonableness . . . allege[d] consist[ed] precisely of setting

up the roadblock in such a manner as to be likely to kill him.").

In

that

employed

event,

he

in Garner,
______

against fleeing

argues, the

471 U.S.

suspects

officers or the public,

the roadblock

at 11,

who pose

particularized

prohibiting

no immediate

analysis

deadly force

danger to

displaces the Graham analysis.

______

only consider the evidence

that

more

the

We need

material to the threshold requirement

be shown

to have

been set

up in

a manner

10

likely to kill Seekamp.

Unlike the "deadman's roadblock" in Brower, 489 U.S. at

______

594

(unilluminated

roadblock hidden

beyond

sharp

curve), the

Seekamp roadblock was brightly illuminated and located at the end

of a long straightaway.

The undisputed evidence established that

it was visible from approximately 1500 feet to the north and that

the

Monte Carlo

without contacting

tioning brakes.

could

have been

brought

to a

the roadblock equipment but

An adequate corridor

not readily apparent to

complete

stop

for its malfunc-

for circumvention, though

vehicles approaching at excessive speed,

had enabled many motorists to bypass the roadblock before Seekamp

arrived.7

to

the

The Seekamp roadblock thus

"deadman's roadblock"

stopped the fleeing suspect

in

stands in marked contrast

Brower and
______

in Garner.
______

the

bullet which

Compare Donovan
_______ _______

v. City
____

of Milwaukee,
____________

17 F.3d 944, 949-50 (7th Cir. 1994) (differentiat-

ing, based on

relative likelihood

between

into a

of death

or serious

injury,

the nondeadly force employed by ramming a police cruiser

speeding car and the

deadly force employed

cruiser into a speeding motorcycle).

by driving a

At the time

there existed

probable

fleeing felon who

Scarborough and

Trooper McAfee established

cause

to

had eluded local

Saco

and continued

believe that

the roadblock,

Seekamp

was

law enforcement officers

to elude

the pursuing

in

MSP

____________________

7Even though the district

able without regard
safe

to the

court found the roadblock reason-

corridor designedly

passage for vehicles traveling at

left to

permit

slow speed, see Seekamp,

___ _______

936 F.Supp at 29, its existence, whether or not determinative, is

a circumstance material to the reasonableness of the roadblock.

11

troopers, see
___

Me. Rev.

Stat.

Ann., tit.

29-A,

(class C crime to

elude officer at reckless speeds

chase);

Me. Rev.

see also
___ ____

(1964) (class

Seekamp

C crime

committed

endangered

the

Stat. Ann.

tit. 17-A,

punishable by five

lesser

pursuing

crimes

as

officers

2501-A

resulting in

1252(2)(C)

years' imprisonment).

well,

and

(1994)

the

which

nonetheless

traveling

public:

driving

at 97 m.p.h. in a 65

m.p.h. zone on the Maine Turnpike,

see Me.
___

Rev. Stat. Ann. tit.

29-A,

(class E

crime to

m.p.h.), and

rolling

exceed

driving to

roadblock, see
___

2074(3) (West

posted speed

endanger

Me. Rev.

limit by

by maneuvering

Stat. Ann.

Supp. 1996)

more than

30

to evade

the

tit. 29-A,

2413

(class E crime) (1964); see also Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit. 17-A,
___ ____

1252(2)(E)

(1964)

imprisonment).

the

arrest

flight

seizure).

crimes

Moreover, Seekamp

throughout

by

(class E

chase.

by six

had been evading

See Graham,
___ ______

factor in

punishable

490

U.S. at

determining

months'

apprehension

396 (evading

reasonableness

of

Thus, the factors for determining reasonableness under

Graham all weighed heavily in

______

favor of employing nondeadly force

to contain Seekamp.

Finally,

Trooper

Michaud

even assuming the

regarding the

information transmitted to

identity

and

condition of

the

driver of the Monte Carlo was neither stale nor unverifiable, the

outcome

under Graham would not be altered.

______

observation

and

eyewitness reports

Relying on firsthand

from other

law enforcement

officers

engaged in

cause to

believe

the pursuit,

that a

fleeing

Trooper Michaud

felon, driving

had probable

at

excessive

12

speeds,

roadblock

had resorted

and

to reckless efforts

refused to

stop.

to evade

In these

the rolling

circumstances

the

information regarding the purported identity and condition of the

person driving the Monte Carlo could not have affected the Graham

______

analysis because the officers were

fully

warranted a

objective

regard

nondeadly

information and

to

the

dangerous actions.

The

roadblock based

the

particular

faced with a situation

serious

influences

Supreme Court

reasonable suspicion

employed

available.

has

turn on

danger

posed,

without

prompting

the

driver's

held, in

the

a closely

"least

intrusive

analogous

a seizure based simply on

does not depend exclusively

on whether the

[investigatory]

means"

United States v. Sokolow, 490 U.S. 1, 11 (1989) ("The

_____________
_______

reasonableness of the officer's

not

available

See id. at 396-97.

___ ___

context, that the constitutionality of

police

on the

which

the

decision to stop a suspect

availability of

less intrusive

does

investigatory

techniques.").

See also United States v. LaFrance, 879 F.2d 1, 5

___ ____ _____________
________

(1st Cir. 1989) (same).

As the Court has explained:

A creative judge engaged in post hoc

tion

of

imagine

police

conduct can

almost

some alternative means

objectives

of the

accomplished.

police

always

by which the

might

have

been

But "[t]he fact that the pro-

tection of the public might have

plished

evalua-

by less

intrusive

itself render the

means

been accomdoes

not

search unreasonable."

The

question is

not

simply whether

some

alternative

was

available, but

whether the

police acted unreasonably

other

in failing to rec-

ognize or pursue it.

United States v. Sharpe, 470 U.S.

______________
______

omitted)

(upholding duration

675, 686-87 (1985) (citations

of investigatory

13

stop as

reason-

able).

Moreover, Seekamp proffers no

tive for

resolving the

irresponsible

resorted

their

conduct.

to the

pursuit.

safety threat

True,

the

alternative Seekamp

Implicit in

premise that fleeing felons

reasonable alterna-

posed by

defendant

his persistent,

officers

now proposes:

this suggestion, of

never

abandoning

course, is the

must be allowed to proceed

on their

reckless way without answering for their criminal conduct despite

the ongoing risk to the traveling public.

recognized

that inaction

on their

The defendant officers

part was

not a

responsible

option

that

in the

circumstances.

We

do likewise

by acknowledging

their actions in setting up the roadblock and effecting the

seizure through nondeadly force were reasonable.8

3.
3.

Supervisory Liability
Supervisory Liability
_____________________

Seekamp

provide

contends

the defendant

supervision.

MSP Chief

failed to

training and

Supervisory liability under 42 U.S.C.

1983 cannot

a respondeat superior theory, Hegarty,

__________ ________
_______

at 1379, but "'only on

omissions[,]'"

the basis of [the supervisor's]

Sanchez v.
_______

Cir. 1996) (quoting

(1st Cir. 1989))

MSP troopers

Skofield

with adequate

be predicated on

or

that

53 F.3d

own acts

Alvarado, 101 F.3d

________

223, 227 (1st

Figueroa v. Aponte-Roque, 864

________
____________

F.2d 947, 953

(alteration in

almost a decade ago, a supervisor:

original).

As

we pointed

out

can

be held liable . . . if (1) the behavior

of

[his] subordinates results in a constitu-

tional violation, and (2)

the [supervisor]'s

____________________

8Therefore,
claims.

See
___

we

Horta, 4
_____

need

not address

F.3d at 9

the

qualified

immunity

(bypassing qualified

immunity

claims in favor of decision on merits).

14

action

or

link[ed]" to

inaction

was

"affirmative[ly]

that behavior in

that it could

be

characterized as

"supervisory encourage-

ment, condonation or acquiescence"

negligence amounting

or "gross

to deliberate indiffer-

ence."

Lipsett v. University of Puerto Rico, 864 F.2d 881, 902 (1st Cir.
_______
_________________________

1988) (citations

to

support

omitted).

Moreover, the

supervisory liability

"deliberate,

reckless

or

under

callous."

indifference required

section

1983 must

be

Gutierrez-Rodriguez
___________________

v.

Cartagena, 882 F.2d 553, 562 (1st Cir. 1989).

_________

mative

link" required between the action or inaction of a super-

visor and

the

Thus, the "affir-

the behavior of subordinates

supervisor's conduct

violation."

led inexorably

"contemplates proof that

to the

constitutional

Hegarty, 53 F.3d at 1380.

_______

The present

claim fails

at a

primitive level,

as it

meets neither test under Lipsett.

_______

First, because the behavior of

the subordinate MSP officers was reasonable in the circumstances,

see supra pt. II,

___ _____

violation

by

B, the required predicate

the subordinate

Lipsett, 864 F.2d at 902.

_______

cannot be

a constitutional

established.

See
___

Second, Seekamp adduced no evidence of

supervisory indifference to proper police training on the part of

defendant Skofield, let alone

to sustain

section 1983

a level of indifference sufficient

supervisory

liability claim.

See
___

Sanchez, 101 F.3d at 229 (mere laxity insufficient to establish

_______

1983 supervisory liability).

ed

that each

subordinate

Quite the contrary, it is undisput-

defendant received

training on

high

speed pursuit and roadblocks, including a refresher course on MSP

high speed pursuit policy, within the year preceding the incident

15

sub judice which itself

___ ______

reflected no inadequate training whatso-

ever.

III
III

CONCLUSION
CONCLUSION
__________

The district court judgment is affirmed.

affirmed
________

16