With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". statements, if made, may open the nurse and Falkoff to charges of poor taste. They do not, by themselves, leave Falkoff liable for an alleged violation of plaintiffs constitutional rights. 4. Morton Hospital, Inc. Is Not Liable Plaintiff alleges that Morton Hospital, Inc. caused her injury by authorizing Falkoff to violate her Fourth Amendment rights through performance of an unconstitutional search. Even if the hospital’s actions can be interpreted as an authorization, however, the hospital is entitled to summary judgment for reasons largely stated above. Plaintiff denies that she is seeking to hold the hospital liable on a theory of respondeat superior. PI. Opp. at 7 (#45). Indeed, it seems unlikely that such a theory is viable under current law. See Duncan, 844 F.2d at 1268 n. 10 (<HOLDING>); DeVargas, 844 F.2d at 723 (same). Plaintiff’s

A: recognizing the restrictive holding of butz v economou 438 us 478 98 sct 2894 57 led2d 895 1978 as applicable only to actions amounting to constitutional violations
B: holding that monell v new york city dept of social services 436 us 658 69093 98 sct 2018 203537 56 led2d 611 1978 eliminated respondeat superior liability for private corporations as well as municipalities
C: holding monell claim fails as a matter of law unless a city employees conduct violates one of the plaintiffs federal rights
D: holding that in order to show municipal liability for an officers actions under monell v dept of soc servs 436 us 658 694 98 sct 2018 56 led2d 611 1978 a plaintiff must demonstrate one of the following 1
B.