How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site.
    Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask LegalEagle1 Your Own Question
LegalEagle1, Attorney
Category: Legal
Satisfied Customers: 794
Experience:  Practicing attorney licensed for over 25 years.
Type Your Legal Question Here...
LegalEagle1 is online now
A new question is answered every 9 seconds

Suing a person in their official capacity? or individually?

This answer was rated:

Suing a person in their official capacity? or individually? What are the important differences?
I am investigating whether I have a cause of action against a local government official. I understand there will likely be a defense of immunity. But my position would be that act giving rise to my monetary damages was an act beyond the authority of that official. In fact, our state supreme court has "adopted the brightline rule..." prohibiting such acts by officials in that particular position.
If I bring action, who would be defendant? official in official capacity? official individually? or both? Official capacity only would likely be a taller hurdle, I suspect, for I failed to comply with some time-sensitive requirements.
Hello and welcome to JustAnswer. I would like to assist you with your question today.

Usually one would sue the person as an individual and in there official capacity. If you sue under just one, they will assert they were acting in the other capacity and that you have failed to state a claim. The key difference is that if the person was acting in an official capacity they may have the defense of immunity. But it sounds like your State Supreme Court may have decided that they don't.

I hope that I have answered your question. Please let me know if you have more questions or need more information.

Please rate my answers with a positive rating (three or more stars) as this is the only way I receive credit and compensation for my work. If you have additional questions or need more information, please ask.

My goal is to provide with best assistance that I can. Please keep in mind that I do not know what you already know or don't know, or with what you need help, unless you tell me. If I did not answer the question you thought you were asking, please respond with the specific question you wanted answered.

Also keep in mind that the law may not always be settled or may not support the position you want. My role is not to tell you what you want to hear. but to provide you accurate information as to what the law provides. Please do not rate me poorly just because the information I have provided does not support the outcome you desire.

You can always request me through my profile at also begin your question with “For LegalEagle1”
Use of this service does not create any attorney client relationship. Information provided is intended to explain general legal principles and assist you in finding an attorney in your area.

Please click "Great" or better to rate service.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

That answer makes sense to me.

Would you now assist me with identifying a proper cause of action?

The prohibited act is one of altering public records without authorization (and, as previously indicated, directly contrary to finding by our sup. ct.)
Would that be fraud? or something else? This is somewhat important because the statute of limitations may come into play. I believe, for example, sol on fraud is on the high end. Whereas other misdeeds have a shorter sol.

This question goes well beyond the scope of your initial inquiry. I don't mind answering an additional short and quick question, but I would greatly appreciate it if you would provide my first response with a positive rating. This is the only way I receive credit for assisting you.

Again why limit your claim to just one theory. If you are going to file a legal action you can assert multiple theories of recovery.

In Wisconsin the statute of limitations for fraud typically is 6 years. The time typically begins to run when the tort is discovered. So if fraud is not discovered until 7 years after it occurred the victim of the fraud can still seek recovery.

Please rate my answers with 3 or more stars so I receive credit for my work. You can continue to ask follow up questions after rating the answers.
LegalEagle1 and 4 other Legal Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

I have opened new question - hopefully you will get it.