Glass v. Anne Arundel Cnty., CIVIL NO.: WDQ-12-1901
| Decision Date | 14 March 2013 |
| Docket Number | CIVIL NO.: WDQ-12-1901 |
| Parties | GARY ALAN GLASS, Plaintiff, v. ANNE ARUNDEL COUNTY, et al., Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of Maryland |
Gary Alan Glass sued Anne Arundel County (the "County") and various Anne Arundel County Police Department ("AACPD") employees1 (collectively, the "Defendants") for civil rights violations under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983, 1985, and 1986. Pending are several motions.2 For the following reasons, Davis, Gilmer, Ryder, and Fraser's motion to dismiss3 will be granted; theDefendants' motion to strike will be denied; and the Defendants' motion to bifurcate and stay discovery will be granted in part and denied in part.
This case arises out of a September 14, 2010 traffic stop in Davidsonville, Maryland, of which the parties offer dramatically different accounts. Glass alleges that he was subjected to false arrest by Collier and malicious prosecution by the Defendants, who "willfully ignored and were deliberately indifferent to overwhelming evidence of [Glass's] actual innocence." Compl. ¶¶ 2-3. The Defendants assert that Glass is a "vindictive malcontent and conspiracy theorist[,] the likes of which Hollywood film director Oliver Stone would be proud." ECF No. 11-1 at 2 n.3.
At about 8:15 a.m. on September 14, 2010, Glass was driving westbound on Rutland Road in Davidsonville, Maryland. Compl. ¶ 20. At the same time, AACPD Officer Collier was driving out of the parking lot of a pediatrician's office at 2772 Rutland Road. Id. ¶ 21. Collier was in an unmarked Ford Escape sport utilityvehicle ("SUV"), owned by Anne Arundel County, with "heavily tinted" windows. Id. ¶ 23. When Glass "exited" a blind "S" curve in Rutland Road about 50 yards east of the pediatrician's driveway, he saw the Ford Escape stopped at the end of the driveway. Id. ¶ 24. As Glass continued to drive toward the driveway, the Ford Escape "suddenly entered" Rutland Road about 20 yards in front of Glass's car. Id. ¶ 25. Glass "immediately" braked and sounded his horn to "alert" the Ford Escape's driver to "the dangerous situation." Id. ¶ 26. About 50 yards ahead, the Ford Escape pulled into the right turn lane at the intersection of Rutland View Road and stopped. Id. ¶ 27. Glass continued driving westbound. Id. ¶¶ 27-28.
After Glass had driven about 300 yards farther, he noticed that the Ford Escape was behind him with blue lights flashing in the windshield. Compl. ¶ 28. Glass pulled over, and the Ford Escape pulled over behind him. Id. ¶¶ 29-30. Glass began to leave the car. Id. ¶ 30. As he did, Collier left the Ford Escape--wearing a t-shirt, running shorts, and sneakers--and ordered Glass to "get back" inside. Id. ¶¶ 30-31. Glass complied. Id. ¶ 30. According to Glass, Collier then "charged up" to Glass's car in an "aggressive manner," "screaming" that "there are laws against blowing your horn." Id. ¶ 31. Collier lifted his t-shirt to display a holstered gun, but did not identify himself as a police officer. Id. ¶¶ 32-33. When Glassexplained he had sounded the horn because of Collier's failure to yield, Collier "again became extremely agitated" and "demanded" Glass's license and registration. Id. ¶¶ 34-35.
At about 8:19 a.m., Collier took Glass's driver's license and registration back to the Ford Escape, where he stayed for about 15 minutes. Compl. ¶ 36. In the interim, Glass called 911. Id.5 Collier returned to Glass's car at about 8:34 a.m.,and "thrust" his fist "into the window" near Glass's face with a small card in hand. Id. ¶¶ 37, 54. Collier stated that he was an Anne Arundel County police officer, but did not provide his name or identification number. Id. ¶ 37. Collier then handed Glass a citation for following too closely, in violation of Md. Code Ann., Transp. § 21-310. Id. ¶ 38.6 Glass told Collier that he would dispute the ticket in court and "hoped" that Collier would attend. Id. Collier became "extremely enraged" and asked if Glass was threatening him. Id. Glass responded that he was not and, after Collier told him he was free to leave, drove away. Id. According to the dispatcher's notes, the traffic stop lasted 17 minutes. See id. ¶ 39; ECF No. 11-3.7 No one else witnessed the stop. See generally Compl. ¶¶ 28-55.8
While Glass was driving home after the incident, he calledChief of Police Teare's office. Compl. ¶ 63. Glass was referred to Major Thomas Wilson. Id. Wilson told Glass that "nothing w[ould] be done" unless Glass filed a written complaint with Internal Affairs. Id. ¶ 64. Glass called Internal Affairs and spoke with Sergeant Greg Speed about the incident. Id. ¶ 65. At about 1:44 p.m. that day, Lieutenant David Feerrar left a voicemail message for Glass in which he stated he was responding to Glass's request to speak with a supervisor in the Southern District. Id. ¶ 66. When Glass returned the call at about 2:00 p.m., Feerrar told him that because he had spoken to Internal Affairs, Feerrar was prohibited from taking further supervisory action. Id. Glass attempted to contact Speed again but was unsuccessful. See id. ¶ 67.
On September 15, 2010, Glass received a call from Davis, who identified himself as the commander of the AACPD's Internal Affairs section. Compl. ¶ 68. Allegedly, Davis attempted to persuade Glass not to pursue the complaint. Id. ¶ 69. On September 30, 2010, Glass sent a letter to Teare with a "detailed explanation" of the incident. Id. ¶ 70. The next day, Davis wrote a letter to Glass acknowledging Glass's complaint. Id. ¶ 71.9
On October 19, 2010, Internal Affairs Corporal Alfred Barcenas interviewed Cooper, Hubbard, and Gilmer about the incident. Compl. ¶ 72.10 Two days later, Barcenas interviewed Glass at AACPD headquarters. Id. ¶ 73. According to Glass, Barcenas used "trickery" in an "unsuccessful effort" to find inconsistencies in Glass's recollection. Id. Collier was not interviewed. Id. ¶ 77.11
Glass received a summons to the District Court for Anne Arundel County for a trial on the traffic citation (the "Traffic case"). Compl. ¶ 82.12 Glass sent a Brady request to the State's Attorney and, on January 3, 2011, issued 10 subpoenas for "witnesses and records to use in his defense." Id.; see ECFNos. 11-4 to -14.13 On January 6, 2011, the County moved to quash. See generally ECF No. 11-19.
At a February 17, 2011 hearing, Judge McKenna ordered the County to produce the Internal Affairs file for in camera review. Compl. ¶ 83; see ECF No. 11-16 at 7 (23:21-24:4). Glass alleges that, in its response to this order, the County withheld materials including Collier's notes on the citation and "falsified" report. Compl. ¶ 83. However, at March 18 and May 16, 2011 hearings, the County informed Judge McKenna that the records it had provided were complete. See, e.g., ECF No. 11-17 at 4 (9:9-11, 11:3-8); ECF No. 11-18 at 8 (26:15-20).14 Judge McKenna granted the motion to quash as to Teare, Callahan,Wilson, Feerrar, Speed, and Barcenas. ECF No. 11-18 at 10 (35:13-18). Judge McKenna also ordered that Glass "may require by service of subpoena" Cooper, Davis, Gilmer, and Hubbard to appear for trial and to produce for use as evidence the AACPD internal affairs records on the charges against Glass. Id.
Trial was held on November 1, 2011. See ECF No. 11-20. Collier, Davis, Gilmer, and Glass testified. Compl. ¶ 88. Glass was acquitted. Id.
On May 4, 2011, Glass sued the County and others in the Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County for "improperly with[olding] public records and fail[ing] to diligently search for records . . . required to be disclosed by the [PIA]" (the "PIA action"). ECF No. 11-21 at 1; see Compl. ¶ 87.15 On August 4, 2011, the defendants moved to dismiss or for summary judgment. Compl. ¶ 89; ECF No. 11-21 at 5. A hearing was held on November 14, 2011. ECF No. 11-21 at 1. In December 2011, Ryder and Davis signed affidavits stating that they had conducted a complete search for Collier's notes and requested Collier to produce his records. Compl. ¶¶ 89, 91. Ryder affirmed that all responsive records were produced. Id. ¶ 89. According to Glass, both affidavits intentionally omittedmaterial facts, such as that Collier's notes and police report were "concealed" until September 2011. Id. ¶ 90. On December 22, 2011, Judge Kiessling granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment, on the grounds that the records requested were "personnel" files, and "Maryland case law clearly mandates nondisclosure of the internal affairs records to anyone who is not a party in interest." ECF No. 11-21 at 10, 12. Glass appealed. ECF No. 11-1 at 3.16
On June 26, 2012, Glass filed this suit against the Defendants for civil rights violations under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983, 1985, and 1986. Compl. ¶ 1,17 He alleged, inter alia, thatCollier unlawfully arrested and detained him, and later fabricated evidence with the assistance of Employee X. Compl. ¶¶ 95, 100-01. Glass further alleged that Davis, Ryder, and Fraser made false statements' with the aim of concealing evidence that would impeach Collier's credibility. Id. ¶ 104. At "all times relevant to this Complaint," Glass alleged that Collier, Employee X, Davis, Ryder, Fraser, and Gilmer were acting "under the direction and control of" the County, and "pursuant to either official policy or the practice, custom, and usage of the County and its police department." Id. ¶ 109. As to each count, Glass sought judgment of at least $5,000,000 plus interest, costs and attorney's fees, as well as $5,000,000 in punitive damages. Id. at 21-24, 32, 34-35. Glass also seeks a permanent injunction to "protect all persons and to prevent such misconduct from happening again." Id. ¶ 5.
On August 2, 2012, Davis, Gilmer, Ryder, and Fraser moved to dismiss or, in the alternative, for summary judgment. ECF No. 11....
To continue reading
Request your trial