Crane v. Fauver, 84-5406

• Decision Date: 28 May 1985
• Docket Number: No. 84-5406,84-5406
• Citation: 762 F.2d 325
• Parties: Dexter CRANE and John R. Sudol, Appellants, v. William H. FAUVER, individually and in his capacity as Commissioner of the Department of Corrections of the State of New Jersey; Gary J. Hilton, individually and in his capacity as Superintendent of Trenton State Prison, and in his capacity as Assistant Commissioner of the Division of Adult Institutions, Department of Corrections, State of New Jersey and in his capacity as Hearing Officer at Trenton State Prison; and, Willis Morton, individually and in his capacity Supervisor of the Vroom Readjustment Unit, Trenton State Prison, and in his capacity as Assistant Superintendent of Trenton State Prison; and, William Jemison, individually and in his capacity as Assistant Superintendent of Trenton State and in his capacity as Hearing Officer of Trenton State Prison; and, Ronald Morton, individually and in his capacity as Senior Correction Officer at Trenton State Prison and in his capacity as Sergeant/Supervisor at Trenton State Prison; and, Ira Freidman, individually and in his capacity as Investigator, Polygraph Expert, Department of Internal Affairs, Department of Corrections, State of New Jersey.
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit

Page 325

762 F.2d 325

Dexter CRANE and John R. Sudol, Appellants, v. William H. FAUVER, individually and in his capacity as

Commissioner of the Department of Corrections of the State

of New Jersey; Gary J. Hilton, individually and in his

capacity as Superintendent of Trenton State Prison, and in

his capacity as Assistant Commissioner of the Division of

Adult Institutions, Department of Corrections, State of New

Jersey and in his capacity as Hearing Officer at Trenton

State Prison; and, Willis Morton, individually and in his

capacity Supervisor of the Vroom Readjustment Unit, Trenton

State Prison, and in his capacity as Assistant

Superintendent of Trenton State Prison; and, William

Jemison, individually and in his capacity as Assistant

Superintendent of Trenton State and in his capacity as

Hearing Officer of Trenton State Prison; and, Ronald

Morton, individually and in his capacity as Senior

Correction Officer at Trenton State Prison and in his

capacity as Sergeant/Supervisor at Trenton State Prison;

and, Ira Freidman, individually and in his capacity as

Investigator, Polygraph Expert, Department of Internal

Affairs, Department of Corrections, State of New Jersey.

No. 84-5406.

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.

Argued Jan. 17, 1985.

Decided May 28, 1985.

Fredric J. Gross (Argued), Mount Ephraim, N.J., for appellants.

Irwin I. Kimmelman, Atty. Gen., James J. Ciancia, Asst. Atty. Gen., Nancy B. Stiles, Deputy Atty. Gen. (Argued), Trenton, N.J., for appellees.

Before HUNTER and HIGGINBOTHAM, Circuit Judges, and KELLY, District Judge. ^*

OPINION OF THE COURT

A. LEON HIGGINBOTHAM, Jr., Circuit Judge.

This is an appeal from a summary judgment of the district court dismissing without prejudice the Sec. 1983 complaint of appellants Dexter Crane and John R. Sudol. For the reasons that follow, we hold that the district court should have retained jurisdiction over this action while staying it pending the outcome of a related state proceeding. Accordingly, we will vacate the judgment of the district court and remand for further proceedings.

I.

This appeal arises out of a complaint filed on January 31, 1983 by Crane and Sudol against appellees William H. Fauver, et al., pursuant to 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 (1982), alleging violations of their constitutional rights in the course of proceedings leading to their discharge as Corrections Officers. Sudol, a Corrections Sergeant at the New Jersey State Prison at Trenton, was charged with conduct unbecoming an employee in public service, specifically, smoking marijuana while on duty. Crane was charged with failure to report Sudol's conduct.

In reviewing this grant of summary judgment for appellees, we take appellants' factual allegations as true and draw all inferences in their favor. The controversy began on January 1, 1981, when Trenton State Prison Corrections Officer Greg Conard took his assigned post in a guard tower at approximately 3:00 P.M., relieving appellee Ronald Morton from his guard position. Conard noticed a strong odor of marijuana, looked around the area and discovered two marijuana cigarette butts--one on the floor and another in an ash tray. Conard immediately reported the discovery to his superior, Vincent Augustoni. Appellants reported that they had conducted a weapons check of the guard tower on January 1, but that they had no knowledge of the marijuana.

Officer Ronald Morton was charged with possession of marijuana. On January 8, 1981, appellee Gary Hilton, the Superintendent of Trenton State Prison, presided over a departmental hearing regarding the charges filed against Morton. Appellants allege that during this hearing Morton testified that he had "no knowledge" of the marijuana in the guard tower. Morton was found guilty of the charge, but according to appellants' complaint no sanctions were imposed at that time.

Appellants allege that on the following morning, January 9, 1981, Ronald Morton was taken to see Hilton by appellee Willis Morton (his brother), the Trenton State Prison official who prosecuted him during the hearing. Appellants allege that at this point defendant Ronald Morton changed his earlier story and reported to Hilton that he had seen plaintiff Sudol smoke a marijuana cigarette on January 1, 1981, in the presence of Crane. Morton gave a written statement and agreed to a polygraph examination, which was taken a few days later by appellee Ira Freidman. Appellants allege that twenty-one days after Ronald Morton's change of story, Sudol was charged with smoking marijuana while on duty, and Crane was charged with failure to report Sudol's conduct.

On February 13, 1981, Hilton presided as Hearing Officer for the charges leveled against Crane, with Willis Morton again acting as prosecutor. Appellants allege that no witnesses were called by the Department of Corrections and that Hilton relied entirely upon Ronald Morton's polygraph examination and the written statements of several witnesses. Appellants allege that they were neither provided with the results of the polygraph examination prior to the hearing nor allowed to cross-examine Ronald Morton during the hearing. Although Crane testified that he did not see Sudol smoke marijuana in the guard tower on January 1, Hilton found Crane guilty of failure to report Sudol's alleged smoking of marijuana, and Crane was terminated effective February 20, 1981.

The hearing on the charges filed against Sudol took place on February 20, 1981, with appellee William Jemison as Hearing Officer and Willis Morton as prosecutor. Robert Reed, attorney for Sudol, objected to the introduction of much of the evidence because defendants had not complied with his written demands for discovery. He also objected to certain reports and written statements, because their authors were not called as witnesses by the Department of Corrections. Jemison ruled that Morton's polygraph examination was inadmissible. Officers Conard and Ronald Morton were called by the Department of Corrections and were cross-examined by attorney Reed. In addition to Sudol's own testimony denying any knowledge of marijuana in the guard tower on the morning in question, attorney Reed called Union representative Murphy (who had also appeared at Crane's hearing). Murphy testified that Ronald Morton had originally denied that Sudol or Crane had smoked marijuana in the guard tower on January 1, 1981. Sudol was found guilty of the charges brought against him and was terminated from his position at Trenton State Prison.

Sudol and Crane then appealed their terminations to the Civil Service Commission, and the matters were referred to the Office of Administrative Law to conduct the necessary hearings. Sudol and Crane made numerous oral and written requests for discovery materials from the Department of Corrections. The actions were consolidated and a hearing began before Administrative Law Judge Jeff S. Masin on February 1, 1982. Sudol and Crane moved to dismiss the charges for failure to comply with discovery requests. The motion was denied; however, the ALJ ordered the Department to provide the requested discovery within six days. After the Department presented its case on February 1, the hearing was adjourned until February 16. The Department still did not comply with discovery, and on March 10, 1982 the ALJ recommended that charges be dismissed and that appellants be reinstated with back pay.

Judge Masin's recommendation was accepted by the Civil Service Commission, which ordered that Sudol and Crane be reinstated with full back pay. The Department of Corrections appealed this ruling to the Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division, asserting that the motions to dismiss should be reversed so that the cases could be decided on their merits. The appellants were reinstated on January 24, 1983, though without back pay.

On January 31, 1983 appellants filed their Sec. 1983 complaint, alleging violations of their rights under the first, fifth and fourteenth amendments. Specifically, the complaint charged that Hilton was seeking to retaliate for Sudol's union activities, and that pressure was placed on Crane to obtain his cooperation in carrying out this vendetta, and thus abridge Sudol's first amendment rights. The complaint further charged that the appellees maliciously conspired to deprive appellants of their due process rights, by depriving them of the opportunity to cross-examine witnesses and to obtain discovery, by giving false testimony, and by failing to provide unbiased hearing officers. In short, as appellants state in their brief, the complaint "fairly asserts that a contrived charge was put to a kangaroo court on account of [Sudol's] union leadership and [Crane's] refusal to falsely denounce him." Appellants sought compensatory and punitive damages, as well as attorneys' fees under 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1988...