You're right, I should have been more clear about that. I was emphasizing only the civil rights aspect of the case, but there is more to it than that.
The state civil case, which is entirely viable, will (correct me if I'm wrong) hinge on whether Rendell and Teamsters Local 115 caused pain and suffering through negligence or intent, rather than whether your rights were violated. Like it's just another fender-bender.
I don't know that the above is the case. Don and I were discussing it just yesterday. We need a more definitive answer. However, my present understanding is that the Teamsters and Ed Rendell can be held for civil rights violations at the state level.
A couple of years ago, when I was pursuing my paralegal diploma, I learned that only the government can be sued at the Federal level for civil rights violations, a moment of truth for me. It was then I understood how necessary it was to tie the local government to an intentional violation of our civil rights even if mostly with circumstantial evidence. To the extent that our case, hinges on circumstantial evidence, and it hinges almost entirely on circumstantial evidence, I believe we did so. We built a very strong case against the local Philadelphia government, well above the standard required in civil court. The judges decision in our case is simply very wrong. They were not going to allow us victory against a sitting governor married to a sitting judge from the Third Circuit.
Again thank you for the exellent post, Physicist. I just wanted people to know there are other avenues to pursue, and Rendell would still be a part of the case at the state level.