412 (1989). The Second Circuit has established a three-part test for demonstrating deliberate indifference: First, the plaintiff must show that a policymaker knows ‘to a moral certainty’ that her employees will confront a given situation.... Second, the plaintiff must show that the situation either presents the employee with a difficult choice of the sort that training or supervision will make less difficult or that there is a history of employees mishandling the situation.... Finally, the plaintiff must show that the wrong choice by the city employee will frequently cause the deprivation of a citizen’s constitutional rights. Walker v. City of New York, 974 F.2d 293, 297-98 (2d Cir.1992) (internal citations omitted); accord Jenkins, 478 F.3d at 94; see also Walker, 974 F.2d at 296 (<HOLDING>). With respect to the first Walker factor,
holding that the plaintiff had offered insufficient evidence to establish deliberate indifference in a failuretotrain claim in part because the plaintiff did not present evidence that the training received was inadequate or evidence of any specific additional training that the employees should have received holding that negligent hiring and training claim was not adequately alleged where plaintiff identified no prior violation by the employee relating to sexual misconduct that could have put the defendant on notice holding that allegations that training was inadequate  the inadequate training constituted deliberate indifference  and the risk of constitutional injury as a result of such deliberate indifference  is very obvious were a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action and were mere conclusions that did not without additional facts state a claim for failuretotrain liability holding that ems training lieutenants position met criteria because the lieutenants developed coordinated implemented and conducted ems training programs  prepared lesson plans and training aids supervised delivery of training and tests and evaluated new equipment holding evidence of single incident without any proof relating to the nature of the training itself insufficient to establish inadequate training because plaintiffs must put forward some evidence that the city itself has acted or consciously not acted