Background
Chantele and Jeremy Foster, a married couple in Walker County, Alabama, experienced a domestic dispute involving a service weapon. Deputy Kevin Emberg responded to a 911 call, entered the home, and ordered the couple to leave. Later, after the Fosters filed a complaint against the deputy, Emberg arrested both of them for domestic violence and harassment. The criminal charges were eventually dismissed with prejudice. The Fosters then filed a civil rights lawsuit under Section nineteen eighty-three, alleging malicious prosecution and seeking damages against Deputy Emberg individually. The deputy moved to dismiss based on state sovereign immunity, which the district court denied. The deputy appealed that denial.
The court’s reasoning
The court reviewed the issue de novo, accepting the plaintiffs’ factual allegations as true. Under Alabama law, deputy sheriffs are alter egos of the sheriff, who is a constitutional executive officer. Consequently, deputy sheriffs are immune from suit to the same extent as sheriffs for acts performed within the scope of their employment. Although the district court relied on a case involving a legislative employee, the Eleventh Circuit concluded that applying the correct legal standard regarding deputy sheriffs would yield the same result: the deputy is entitled to immunity. The court noted that the Alabama Supreme Court recently reaffirmed this principle in a 2025 decision.
What it means going forward
Law enforcement officers in Alabama, specifically deputy sheriffs, retain broad state sovereign immunity from individual capacity lawsuits for actions taken within the scope of their employment, even when those actions lead to criminal charges that are later dismissed.
Podcast (federal-narrative-summaries): Play in new window | Download