## Facts

- Craig Bryant Northington was incarcerated at the Denver County Jail and participated in a work-release community corrections program.
- After an internal affairs investigation involving another deputy, Northington cooperated with investigators and was viewed by some staff as an informer.
- Northington alleged Deputy Sheriff Jesse Marin retaliated by telling inmates that Northington was a “snitch” or informer.
- Multiple inmates testified that Marin spread the “snitch” label among inmates.
- Northington was assaulted several times by inmates who accused him of being a snitch.
- Marin denied spreading the rumor but admitted that an inmate labeled a snitch would “most likely be beaten.”
- Evidence indicated other deputies also spread the same rumor, and the proof did not identify which deputy’s statements directly prompted each assault.

## Issues

1. Whether imposing § 1983 liability for inmate-on-inmate assaults required an explicit finding that Marin acted with deliberate indifference (subjective recklessness) to a known risk of serious harm.
2. Whether causation was satisfied where multiple officers may have spread the same dangerous rumor and the evidence could not tie particular assaults to Marin’s specific statements.
3. Whether the district court properly conducted de novo review of the magistrate judge’s report when objections were filed.
4. Whether the attorney’s fee award was excessive in light of the $5,000 damages award.

## Decision

- The Tenth Circuit affirmed the judgment for Northington and affirmed the attorney’s fee award.
- The court held the findings supported Eighth Amendment “failure to protect/creation of risk” liability under § 1983 because Marin knowingly exposed Northington to a substantial risk of serious harm by labeling him a snitch.
- The court upheld causation on a substantial-factor theory despite other potential rumor-spreaders, because Marin’s conduct materially contributed to the risk that produced the assaults.
- The court rejected claims of improper burden shifting on causation.
- The court concluded the district court’s order and record reflected adequate de novo review of the challenged findings.

## Legal Principles

- A jail official violates the Eighth Amendment under § 1983 by knowingly exposing an inmate to a substantial risk of serious harm, including by labeling the inmate a “snitch” with awareness that inmate violence is a likely consequence.
- Deliberate indifference may be supported by evidence the official understood the danger and nevertheless engaged in conduct that increased the risk.
- Causation may be established under a substantial-factor/concurrent-cause theory when multiple forces are each sufficient to bring about the harm and at least one sufficient force exists because of the defendant’s wrongful conduct, even if precise apportionment among actors is not possible.
- Prevailing civil rights plaintiffs are ordinarily entitled to reasonable attorney’s fees under fee-shifting principles; a modest damages award does not, by itself, make an otherwise reasonable fee excessive.

## Conclusion

The court affirmed § 1983 liability and fees where a deputy’s deliberate act of labeling an inmate a “snitch” foreseeably exposed the inmate to serious harm from other prisoners, and it treated the deputy’s conduct as a substantial factor causing the assaults even though other officers may have spread similar rumors and exact attribution was not feasible.


Northington v. Marin, 102 F.3d 1564 (10th Cir. 1996)