6 results for 'cat:"Civil Rights" AND cat:"Malicious Prosecution" AND cat:"Immunity"'.
J. Sannes preserves a Black man’s amended civil rights complaint alleging he was wrongfully convicted of rape and sentenced to 16 years in prison. It was discovered later that an assistant district attorney involved in the case coerced the victim into changing whom she believed was the attacker following a lineup procedure. The court finds the assistant district attorney is not entitled to prosecutorial immunity because his duties at the time were investigatory, not prosecutorial, and the county is vicariously liable for his actions. The court also preserves a cross-claim filed by the city of Syracuse against the county and the ADA for contribution, apportionment and indemnification.
Court: USDC Northern District of New York, Judge: Sannes, Filed On: March 11, 2024, Case #: 5:22cv1241, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, malicious Prosecution, immunity
J. Magnus-Stinson rules in part for law enforcement, business defendants, and prosecutors in civil rights claims. The business defendant, a private corporation, cannot be sued for conspiring to violate plaintiff's civil rights related to a drug arrest, and prosecutors have immunity against claims contending they should have refrained from taking plaintiff to trial. However, malicious prosecution claims specifically based on the fourth amendment may proceed because plaintiff was acquitted of the criminal charges.
Court: USDC Southern District of Indiana, Judge: Magnus-Stinson, Filed On: February 21, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv2303, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, malicious Prosecution, immunity
J. Sannes dismisses four public officials in Hudson, New York, from a civil rights lawsuit asserting claims for false arrest, unlawful search and seizure, and malicious prosecution stemming from their involvement in a citizen’s arrest on charges of attempted murder with a gun and conspiracy to commit murder. The litigants allege the arrest was part of an ongoing investigation into a local gang called “Men Outta Business.” The two local district attorneys who brought the charges against the litigant are both protected by sovereign immunity, and the litigant fails to allege any personal involvement on the part of the police chief or one of the named police officers.
Court: USDC Northern District of New York, Judge: Sannes, Filed On: October 13, 2023, Case #: 1:22cv1152, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, malicious Prosecution, immunity
J. Mehalchick finds that Scranton school board defendants are immune from certain liability as high public officials but allows a maintenance director to continue malicious prosecution, false arrest, and false imprisonment claims contending he had been "scapegoated" when the public found out the school contained toxic lead and asbestos, even though he had tried to warn the school about these hazardous conditions for years. The maintenance worker successfully alleges his arrest for endangering children had been based on false statements designed to shield school defendants from responsibility.
Court: USDC Middle District of Pennsylvania, Judge: Mehalchick, Filed On: September 11, 2023, Case #: 3:22cv1514, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, malicious Prosecution, immunity
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Grimberg finds in favor of the police officer and sheriff's deputy in a civil rights, malicious prosecution, assault and battery action brought by an individual arising from his arrest following an altercation with the police officer over his violation of courtroom phone etiquette protocol. There was probable cause to arrest the individual because a reasonable person would have believed he committed a criminal offense in his altercation with the officer. The officer is entitled to qualified immunity because he was acting within the scope of his discretionary authority at the time of the incident. The officer's use of force in arresting the individual was reasonable.
Court: USDC Northern District of Georgia, Judge: Grimberg, Filed On: August 14, 2023, Case #: 1:21cv4846, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, malicious Prosecution, immunity