Pa. Supreme Court: Pittsburgh not liable for cop's damages in pumpkin-smasher case

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court on Wednesday ruled that the City of Pittsburgh is not responsible for paying a $75,000 jury award against an off-duty police officer who chased down a teenager and broke his nose after the 16-year-old was caught smashing pumpkins in the man’s neighborhood.

Shane McGuire, now 26, was out with friends the night of Nov. 12, 2012, in the city’s New Homestead neighborhood when he banged on the front door of off-duty Pittsburgh police Officer Colby Neidig.

Neidig claimed he believed someone was breaking into his home and chased McGuire, catching him in woods about a half-mile away.

Neidig broke McGuire’s nose, and then held him until on-duty police officers arrived. Neidig was not in uniform and did not have his badge or gun on him at the time.

Related:

• Pittsburgh claims damages exemption for cop who beat up teen caught smashing pumpkins

McGuire was not convicted of any crime. He filed a federal lawsuit against Neidig and the city alleging civil rights claims, including excessive force, assault and battery.

The judge dismissed the city as a defendant, and a jury, in 2017, ruled in McGuire’s favor.

Neidig was ordered to pay $75,000 in damages, plus $160,000 in attorney’s fees.

The officer assigned his right to sue for indemnification to McGuire, who then filed suit against the city. McGuire argued that Pennsylvania law protects municipal employees from being held personally responsible for claims that happen within the scope of their official duties, and that the City of Pittsburgh was required to pay the judgment.

The city, however, fought the indemnification, arguing that Neidig was acting as a private citizen, and therefore, responsible for the claim himself.

That issue went to a jury trial in Allegheny County Common Pleas Court in 2019, and the jury ruled in favor of the city.

McGuire appealed to the Commonwealth Court, which affirmed the jury’s decision and then to the state Supreme Court, which heard oral argument in April.

The case turned on specific language in Pennsylvania law on indemnification.

A municipality is required to indemnify an employee if the action in question “was … within the scope of his office or duties.”

McGuire’s attorney argued that the federal jury found that Neidig, who was no longer with the city police at the time of the court argument, was acting under “color of law,” and that the two phrases ought to be interchangeable.

But the city — and Wednesday’s Supreme Court decision — said otherwise.

“[T]he ‘color of state law’ inquiry turns on whether the public employee purported to exercise official state authority, not whether he or she was authorized — or reasonably believed himself or herself to be authorized — to act in a certain way,” wrote Justice David Wecht. “This means that a police officer may sometimes act both ‘under color of state law’ and beyond the scope of his or her employment.”

He continued, “the federal jury simply did not consider whether Neidig acted within the scope of his office or duties.”