Who pays
In most police abuse cases the officer is the defendant and the employer pays. That happens because state statutes tell governments to indemnify their employees, or allow them to, for acts within the scope of the job. Each statute has an exit for intentional or willful wrongdoing, and the four states draw it differently. Punitive damages run against the individual officer and never against the municipality. The city itself is liable on the federal claim only under Monell. This page sets out the rules and the public record of what New York City pays.
A judgment is worth what the defendant can pay. Few officers can pay a large one. So the practical question in every case is whether a government stands behind the officer, and the answer is in four statutes: General Municipal Law § 50-k in New York City, N.J.S.A. 59:10-1 and 59:10-4 in New Jersey, Fla. Stat. § 111.071 in Florida, and 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 8548 and 8550 in Pennsylvania. They share a structure. The employer pays for acts within the scope of employment, and stops paying somewhere along the line from negligence to malice.
That line matters for how a case is pleaded and tried. The same facts that support punitive damages against an officer can be the facts that release the employer from paying for him.
Indemnification, state by state
New York City: General Municipal Law § 50-k
The City "shall indemnify and save harmless" its employees in the amount of any judgment, or any settlement the City has approved, for acts within the scope of their employment. The duty does not arise where the injury resulted from intentional wrongdoing or recklessness on the part of the employee (N.Y. Gen. Mun. Law § 50-k(3)). That is what the statute says, and we state it no more broadly than that. Its exception is written in terms of the employee's conduct.
New Jersey: N.J.S.A. 59:10-1 and 59:10-4
Two rules, depending on the employer. The State indemnifies the employees it defends, and it is not required to pay punitive damages (N.J.S.A. 59:10-1). Local public entities are empowered to indemnify their employees. The statute is permissive, and it extends to punitive damages unless the act was actual fraud, actual malice, willful misconduct or an intentional wrong (N.J.S.A. 59:10-4). For a city, township or county officer, the permissive rule is the one that applies.
Florida: Fla. Stat. § 111.071
A public entity is authorized to pay judgments against its officers. In a Section 1983 action, payment of the full judgment may be made unless the officer is determined to have caused the harm intentionally, and that payment is not limited by the statutory caps in § 768.28 (Fla. Stat. § 111.071(1)(a)). That last clause is the important one in Florida. The caps of $200,000 per person and $300,000 per incident limit damages on state-law claims against the government. They do not limit what the government may pay on a federal judgment against its officer. On the state-law side, the officer is personally liable only for bad faith, malicious purpose, or wanton and willful disregard of human rights, safety or property (§ 768.28(9)(a)).
Pennsylvania: 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 8548 and 8550
A local agency "shall indemnify" an employee for a judgment arising from acts within the scope of the employee's duties (§ 8548(a)). The duty is mandatory. It is lost where it is judicially determined that the act was a crime, actual fraud, actual malice or willful misconduct, and the same finding removes the employee's official immunity and the statutory damages limit (§ 8550).
| State | Statute | Duty | Where it stops |
|---|---|---|---|
| New York (City of New York) | Gen. Mun. Law § 50-k(3) | Mandatory: "shall indemnify and save harmless," judgments and approved settlements | Injury resulting from intentional wrongdoing or recklessness |
| New Jersey, the State | N.J.S.A. 59:10-1 | Indemnifies employees it defends | Not required for punitive damages |
| New Jersey, local entities | N.J.S.A. 59:10-4 | Permissive: "empowered," including punitive damages | Actual fraud, actual malice, willful misconduct, intentional wrong |
| Florida | Fla. Stat. § 111.071(1)(a) | Permissive: "authorized"; full Section 1983 judgment, outside the § 768.28 caps | Officer determined to have caused the harm intentionally |
| Pennsylvania, local agencies | 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 8548(a), 8550 | Mandatory: "shall indemnify" | Judicial determination of crime, actual fraud, actual malice or willful misconduct |
Punitive damages: the officer, never the municipality
Punitive damages under Section 1983 are available against an individual where the conduct is "motivated by evil motive or intent, or when it involves reckless or callous indifference to the federally protected rights of others" (Smith v. Wade, 461 U.S. 30 (1983)). They are not available against a municipality at all (City of Newport v. Fact Concerts, 453 U.S. 247 (1981)). Florida adds that no punitive damages may be awarded against the government on a state-law claim (Fla. Stat. § 768.28(5)(a)).
Set that beside the indemnification statutes and the tension is plain. The standard for punitive damages, evil motive or reckless indifference, sits close to the conduct that ends the employer's duty to pay: recklessness in New York City, willful misconduct in Pennsylvania, intentional harm in Florida. A punitive award may be one the officer has to pay personally. That is a fact to weigh, with a lawyer, before a case is framed around punishment and not compensation. The Second Circuit affirmed a jury's $20,000 punitive damages award against an individual officer in Garnett v. Undercover Officer C0039, 838 F.3d 265 (2d Cir. 2016); that figure is a jury award in another person's case.
The city as a defendant: Monell
Indemnification is the employer paying for its employee. Liability of the employer itself is a different thing. Under the federal claim there is no vicarious liability: a municipality is a "person" that can be sued, but only where an official policy or custom caused the violation (Monell v. Dep't of Social Servs., 436 U.S. 658 (1978)), and each official answers only for his or her own conduct (Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009)). A failure to train counts only where it amounts to deliberate indifference (City of Canton v. Harris, 489 U.S. 378 (1989)), and a pattern of similar violations is ordinarily necessary (Connick v. Thompson, 563 U.S. 51 (2011)). The Monell page goes through the proof.
A State is not a "person" under Section 1983 at all (Will v. Michigan Dep't of State Police, 491 U.S. 58 (1989)), so a case about state troopers or state corrections officers runs against the individuals, and the State's indemnification statute decides who pays. Not every public body shares that status: on March 4, 2026 the Supreme Court held that NJ Transit is not an arm of the State and has no sovereign immunity (Galette v. New Jersey Transit Corp., No. 24-1021).
State law is often more direct. In New York the state-law torts run against the employer for what its officer did, which is why the 90-day notice of claim is worth serving. In Pennsylvania the local agency is immune from those torts. The state recovery pages explain each.
Why the City pays, and what it pays
New York City pays because § 50-k requires it to, within the statute's limits. What it pays is public. The Legal Aid Society's analysis of Law Department data, released March 2, 2026, counts payouts in NYPD misconduct lawsuits by year of disposition:
| Year | Lawsuits | Paid by the City |
|---|---|---|
| 2025 | 1,044 | $117,251,230.82 |
| 2024 | 980 | $206,472,256.53 |
| 2023 | 811 | $115,852,780.64 |
| 2022 | 973 | $135,404,617.10 |
| 2021 | 753 | $87,405,727.13 |
| 2020 | 929 | $62,103,991.67 |
| 2019 | 1,276 | $71,723,242.62 |
| 2019 to 2025 | 6,766 | $796,213,846.51 |
Source: the Legal Aid Society, March 2, 2026, from Law Department data. Every figure is a payout by the City of New York in other people's lawsuits, by year of disposition, excluding claims the Comptroller settled before litigation. Public statistics, not results of this firm and not a prediction.
The Comptroller counts claims, which include the ones settled before any lawsuit. In fiscal 2023, 6,891 tort claims were filed against the NYPD, and 2,821 were resolved for $266.7 million in payouts, 36 percent of the City's tort payout cost and the highest of any agency (NYC Comptroller, Annual Claims Report, fiscal 2023). The by the numbers page has more, including the complaint figures.
If a criminal charge from the same incident is pending, talk to your defense lawyer before describing the arrest to anyone; the criminal case and civil case page explains why.
Monell and municipal liability
Policy, custom, failure to train, and what it takes to hold the city itself liable.
Monell →Liens, taxes and fees
What comes out of a recovery before it reaches you, and what can be added to it.
What comes out →Recovery, all four states
The federal claim against the state claims, and the comparison table for the four states.
Recovery →Common questions
If I sue a police officer, does the officer pay personally?
Usually the employer pays, under an indemnification statute. New York City must indemnify employees for judgments and approved settlements for acts within the scope of employment, under General Municipal Law 50-k(3), and the duty does not arise where the injury resulted from intentional wrongdoing or recklessness. New Jersey, Florida and Pennsylvania each have their own statute with their own exception.
Can a city be made to pay punitive damages?
Not under Section 1983. City of Newport v. Fact Concerts holds that a municipality is immune from punitive damages. Punitive damages run against the individual officer under Smith v. Wade. Whether the employer then pays that award for the officer depends on the state's indemnification statute: New Jersey, for example, lets local entities cover punitive damages unless the act was actual fraud, actual malice, willful misconduct or an intentional wrong.
Why sue the city at all if it pays for the officer anyway?
Because indemnification has exceptions, and in New Jersey and Florida the statutes are permissive. A claim against the city itself, under Monell for a policy or custom, or under state law for its officer's torts, puts a defendant in the case whose ability to pay is not in doubt. It also reaches the practice that caused the violation, not only the officer who carried it out.
How much does New York City pay each year?
The Legal Aid Society's analysis of Law Department data, released March 2, 2026, counts $117,251,230.82 paid in 1,044 NYPD misconduct lawsuits in 2025 and $796,213,846.51 in 6,766 lawsuits from 2019 to 2025. Those are payouts in other people's lawsuits, excluding pre-litigation Comptroller settlements, and they are not a prediction.
Tell us what happened.
One conversation with an attorney, in your language. We tell you which claims the facts support, which deadline runs first for the agency involved, what evidence to preserve this week, and whether a pending criminal case changes the timing. If it is not a case we can take, we say so and tell you where to go.
(718) 484-7510If a criminal charge is still open, talk to your defense lawyer before you describe the arrest to anyone, including us. English, Russian and Spanish in-house; an interpreter for any other language. Contingency fee, confirmed in writing before we begin.