Doe v. City of N.Y.
| Decision Date | 09 January 2020 |
| Docket Number | 18-cv-670 (ARR) (JO) |
| Parties | Anna Doe, Plaintiff, v. The City of New York, Detective Richard Hall, Detective Eddie Martins, and Police Officer Gregory Markov, Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of New York |
The plaintiff, Anna Doe, alleges that New York City Police Department Detectives Richard Hall and Eddie Martins stopped her in a public park, took her into custody, repeatedly raped her in the back of their police van, and released her without charging her with any crime. She sought treatment that night at Maimonides Hospital. Officer Gregory Markov—along with a number of additional, unnamed police officers—met her there, purportedly to investigate her rape allegation. Instead, Doe contends, they mocked and bullied her in an attempt to prevent her from filing a complaint against their fellow police officers.
Doe filed suit in Kings County Supreme Court against Hall, Martins, Markov, and the City of New York, along with Hall and Martins' supervisor, Sergeant John Espey, and the unnamed police officers who met Doe at the hospital. The City removed the complaint to federal court. In August 2018, I dismissed the claims against Espey and the unnamed police officers, as well as several claims against the City. Remaining are Doe's claim against Markov for First Amendment retaliation, her respondeat superior claim against the City for false arrest and imprisonment, and all of her claims against Hall and Martins. Markov and the City have moved for summary judgment; Hall and Martins do not join their motion. Doe opposes. For the reasons set forth below, the defendants' motion for summary judgment is denied.
On September 15, 2017 at around 7:30 or 8:00 p.m., plaintiff Anna Doe drove with two friends, Mitchell and David ("Snoopy"), to Calvert Vaux Park in Brooklyn (the "Park"). Defs.' Rule 56.1 Statement ¶¶ 1-2, ECF No. 100 ( ); Pl.'s Resp. to Defs.' 56.1 at ¶¶ 1-2, ECF No. 103; Pl.'s 56.1 Counter-Statement ¶ 3, ECF No. 103; Defs.' Resp. to Pl.'s 56.1 Counter-Statement ¶ 3, ECF No. 106. They took Snoopy's car, with Doe driving. Defs.' 56.1 at ¶ 1; Pl.'s Resp. to Defs.' 56.1 at ¶ 1. The three friends soon arrived at the Park's parking lot, where they stopped and Mitch prepared two marijuana cigarettes. Defs.' 56.1 at ¶ 13; Pl.'s Resp. to Defs.' 56.1 at ¶ 13.1 According to Doe, the two cigarettes ended up in the cup holder by the front seats, along with a clear bag containing some loose marijuana. See Doe 50-h Tr. Defs.' Ex. B at 389:4-390:3, ECF No. 101-2. At the same time, New York City Police Department ("NYPD") Detectives Hall and Martins sat in their unmarked Dodge Caravan in the parking lot. Defs.' 56.1 at ¶¶ 5-6; Pl.'s Resp. to Defs.' 56.1 at ¶¶ 5-6.
Doe noticed a dirt road inside the Park and saw that the gate at its entrance was open. Defs.' 56.1 at ¶ 14; Pl.'s Resp. to Defs.' 56.1 at ¶ 14. By this time, it was dark outside, and the dirt road wound through a wooded area with no artificial lighting. See Defs.' 56.1 at ¶¶ 18-19; Pl.'s Resp. to Defs.' 56.1 at ¶¶ 18-19; Pl.'s 56.1 Counter-Statement ¶ 4; Defs.' Resp. to Pl.'s 56.1 Counter-Statement ¶ 4. Doe drove onto the dirt road toward a dark, unpaved lot, which contained some shipping containers but was otherwise empty. Defs.' 56.1 at ¶¶ 17, 19, 21; Pl.'s Resp. to Defs.' 56.1 at ¶¶ 17, 19, 21. Sometimes, people would park their cars in this lot during sporting events in the nearby fields; however, on this night, no one was playing sports in the fields. Defs.' 56.1 at ¶ 20; Pl.'s Resp. to Defs.' 56.1 at ¶ 20. Hall and Martins followed Doe onto the dirt road. Defs.' 56.1 at ¶ 26; Pl.'s Resp. to Defs.' 56.1 at ¶ 26.
Hall and Martins then turned on their van's police lights and pulled over Doe and her passengers. Defs.' 56.1 at ¶ 30; Pl.'s Resp. to Defs.' 56.1 at ¶ 30. The detectives exited their van and walked to Snoopy's car, with Hall approaching Doe on the driver side and Martins approaching the passenger side. Defs.' 56.1 at ¶ 33; Pl.'s Resp. to Defs.' 56.1 at ¶ 33; see Martins Dep. Defs.' Ex. G at 190:9-191:18, ECF No. 101-7. Hall asked Doe why she was "back there" on the dirt road and said, in sum and substance, "[y]ou know you guys aren't supposed to be here, right?" Defs.' 56.1 at ¶ 34; Pl.'s Resp. to Defs.' 56.1 at ¶ 34. He told Doe that she and her passengers could not be in that area of the Park because it was after dark. Defs.' 56.1 at ¶ 35; Pl.'s Resp. to Defs.' 56.1 at ¶ 35. Hall and Martins instructed Doe and her passengers to exit the car and frisked them. Defs.' 56.1 at ¶¶ 41-42; Pl.'s Resp. to Defs.' 56.1 at ¶¶ 41-42. Martins also searched Doe's handbag, where he found half an ounce of marijuana, two Klonopin pills, and a filled water bong. Defs.' 56.1 at ¶¶ 43-45; Pl.'s Resp. to Defs.' 56.1 at ¶¶ 43-45. Doe also had a bag in her bra containing twenty dollars' worth of cocaine. Defs.' 56.1 at ¶ 37; Pl.'s Resp. to Defs.' 56.1 at ¶ 37. Martins handcuffed Doe and led her into the back of the police van. Defs.' 56.1 at ¶ 46; Pl.'s Resp. to Defs.' 56.1 at ¶ 46.
Doe alleges that Hall and Martins drove her to the parking lot of a Chipotle restaurant in Brooklyn, where they raped her. Third Am. Compl. ¶ 14, ECF No. 42. They then proceeded todrive around Brooklyn, repeatedly raping her along the way until they released her near the NYPD's 60th precinct without charging her with any crime. Id. ¶¶ 15-17.
Several disputes of fact surround the detectives' stop of Doe and her passengers. The defendants assert that the detectives stopped Doe for at least one of three reasons: because they believed Snoopy's car had excessively tinted windows, because they believed Doe and her passengers' presence in the Park violated the City's park rules, or because they believed Doe and her passengers possessed or consumed illegal drugs. I will discuss the facts surrounding each of these purported bases for the stop in turn.
The parties dispute whether Snoopy's car had tinted windows. Hall testified that Snoopy's car had windows tinted in excess of the level that governing ordinances permitted. See Hall Dep. Pl.'s Ex. E at 157:3-5, 164:15-18, ECF No. 104-5. He saw the tinted windows before pulling over Doe, while the police van was still moving. See Hall Dep. Volume II Defs.' Ex. I at 236:5-13, ECF No. 101-9. Hall testified that New York State law requires a car's windows to allow seventy percent of light to pass through. Id. 235:10-12. Based on his experience, when he cannot "see clearly into the car" through the windows, "then the windows are tinted beyond the regulation." Id. 235:18-20. Martins, however, could not remember at his deposition whether Snoopy's car had tinted windows. See Martins Dep. Pl.'s Ex. D at 121:9-11, ECF No. 104-4. He further testified that he did not think that he was able to observe whether Snoopy's car had tinted windows, or that he did not think that Snoopy's car had tinted windows; his phrasing is unclear. See id. 198:6-9. Doe testified that Snoopy's car did not have tinted windows and that Hall and Martins' police van did have tinted windows. See Doe Dep. Defs.' Ex. C at 57:11-15, ECF No. 101-3.
The defendants assert that Doe and her friends violated park rules by occupying the Park because the Park—or at least the area beyond the gate at the entrance to the dirt road—was closed. Under New York City Rules, "[p]ersons may enter and use the parks from 6:00 a.m. until 1:00 a.m. unless other open hours are posted at any park[,]" and "[n]o person shall enter or remain in any park without the permission of the Commissioner when such park is closed to the public." Rules of City of New York Department of Parks and Recreation (56 RCNY) § 1-03(a)(1), (3).
The parties dispute whether the Park contained any signs indicating that the Park was closed at or around 8:00 p.m. Doe testified that the Park did not close at dark. Doe 50-h Tr. Defs.' Ex. B at 187:15-17. Martins testified that "there should be signs in the entrance of the park" stating the hours of operation but that he did not recall whether he saw any such signs. Martins Dep. Pl.'s Ex. D at 26:9-18. He also testified that he believed the dirt road in particular contained a "no trespass" sign. Martins Dep. Defs.' Ex. G at 185:18-21. Hall testified that he thought a sign marked the dirt road as a prohibited area but could not recall what the sign said verbatim. Hall Dep. Pl.'s Ex. E at 174:13-19. Markov testified that he had visited the Park at night, that it is open at night—including at 8:00 p.m. in particular—and that he had not noticed any signs in the Park at all. Markov Dep. Pl.'s Ex. F at 153:8-23, ECF No. 104-6. Frank Abbriano, a Lieutenant in Markov's precinct, testified that he was familiar with the Park and that while he believed it closed at night, he had never seen any signs indicating as much. See Abbriano Dep. Pl.'s Ex. H at 9:3-10, 59:25-60:9, 60:22-61:9, ECF No. 104-8. Espey testified that he had patrolled the Park at night, that he had always encountered people in the Park at night, and that the Park had always been open when he visited at night; he testified that while the specific times of night at which he patrolled the Park varied, he could have patrolled it—and found it open—after 8:00 p.m. Espey Dep. Pl.'s Ex. G at 31:2-24, ECF No. 104-7.
The testimony also reveals disputes as to whether a gate or barrier typically blocks access to the dirt road at night. Doe testified that on the night of September 15, 2017, the gate leading to the dirt road was open, but that usually it was not open and the dirt road was closed to the public at night. Doe 50-h Tr. Defs.' Ex. B at 185:14-17, 187:6-14. She further testified that she remembered telling Snoopy that the detectives were going to stop them because they were driving on the dirt road, and "[p]eople don't really go back there." Id. 395:9-13. However, she...
To continue reading
Request your trial