In civil lawsuits, who else besides the officer might be sued under the "deep pockets" theory?

In civil lawsuits, the "deep pockets" theory refers to the practice of pursuing not only the individual directly responsible for an action but also those who have the financial resources to pay for any potential judgments or settlements. In this context, the agency and city council can be held liable alongside the officer for a variety of reasons.

When an officer is accused of misconduct, the government entity employing that officer—such as a police department or corrections agency—can also face legal responsibility if it can be shown that a policy or practice led to the misconduct. This includes failures such as inadequate training, lack of supervision, or non-compliance with established protocols. The city council may also play a role since they are responsible for overseeing the agency’s operations and funding, and thus could be implicated if systemic issues are proven to exist.

This approach makes it more feasible for plaintiffs to recover damages, especially since public entities often have insurance or larger budgets than individual officers. Consequently, suing both the agency and the city council is a strategy used by plaintiffs to ensure that they pursue parties that are more likely to have the financial means to settle or cover damages than an individual officer might.

In contrast, the other options do not typically align with this theory. An attorney, while crucial in