Grinols v. Beers

Decision Date05 April 2021
Docket Number18-CV-6620L
Parties Daniel GRINOLS, Plaintiff, v. Brandon BEERS, et al., Defendants.
CourtU.S. District Court — Western District of New York

Andrew Collin Weiss, Glenn David Miller, Edward Sivin, Moses Myungchul Ahn, Sivin & Miller, LLP, New York, NY, for Plaintiff.

Bernard F. Sheehan, NYS Attorney General's Office Department of Law, Matthew D. Brown, New York State Office of the Attorney General, Rochester, NY, for Defendants.

DECISION AND ORDER

DAVID G. LARIMER, United States District Judge

INTRODUCTION

On the evening of July 15, 2015, plaintiff Daniel Grinols, who was riding a motorcycle, was involved in a "road rage" incident with defendant Brandon Beers, who was driving an SUV, stemming from what each of them perceived to be reckless or aggressive driving by the other. At one point, both Grinols and Beers pulled off to the side of the road, and began yelling at each other. After a brief shouting match, which involved no physical contact between them or their vehicles, both Grinols and Beers drove off and went their separate ways.

There the matter might have ended, and probably should have, but it did not. The next day, Beers, who was a trooper with the New York State Police, reported the incident to his sergeant. Grinols ended up being arrested and charged by the State Police with three felonies, a misdemeanor, and four traffic violations, all stemming from the July 15 incident. All the charges were eventually dismissed or withdrawn.

Grinols filed the complaint in this action on August 27, 2018, against five individuals, all of whom were at all relevant times New York State troopers: Beers, Devon Dunn, Lindsay Mark, Donald Rodbourn, and Kurt Eaton. Plaintiff filed an amended complaint on October 31, 2018, asserting four causes of action. Since then, plaintiff has voluntarily withdrawn two claims in their entirety and one claim, partially. What remains are (1) a claim against defendants Beers, Mark, and Rodbourn for malicious prosecution, and (2) a claim against all five defendants for failing to intervene to stop the malicious prosecution from continuing. Defendants have now moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

On July 15, 2014, around 9:30 pm, Grinols was riding a motorcycle, with a passenger, his girlfriend Alicia McLaughlin. His friend Charles Fink was riding with him on another motorcycle. They were heading west on County Route 70A in the Town of Hornellsville, NY.

Meanwhile, Beers, who was off duty, was driving his SUV. His wife and two young children were also in the vehicle. They were heading north on Seneca Road.

Grinols, Fink, and Beers all arrived at the intersection of Seneca Road and Route 70A at about the same time. There is a four-way stop at the intersection, marked by stop signs.

All the vehicles stopped at the intersection. Beers then proceeded, continuing north on Seneca Road. Grinols and Fink turned right onto Seneca Road behind Beers. At that point, they were all headed to their respective homes.1

The parties agree on that much. From there, their accounts begin to differ, often significantly. According to Grinols, as he was riding behind Beers, he noticed that Beers's vehicle was drifting out of and back into its lane. At an intersection with another four-way stop, Grinols alleges that he saw Beers's SUV go through the intersection without stopping. He suspected that the driver of the SUV may have been drunk.

A short distance later, all three vehicles turned onto Airport Road, still headed north. A short while later, Grinols passed Beers. According to Grinols, Beers turned on his right turn signal and began pulling off to the right side of the road, seemingly with the intention of entering a parking lot at that spot. Grinols passed him, and Beers immediately re-entered the lane and began following him. The three vehicles continued northbound, with Grinols in the lead, Beers behind him, and Fink bringing up the rear.

Grinols states that Beers then began tailgating him and flashing his high beams. Fearing for his safety, Grinols sped up to around 55 mph (the speed limit in that stretch of road was 35 mph), but Beers kept pace with him.

After continuing this way for a while, Grinols pulled off to the side of the road and turned off his motorcycle. Beers pulled in behind him, and Fink arrived seconds later and pulled up on the left side of Beers's SUV.

In a nutshell, the following is Beers's account of what led up to this point in the narrative. After Beers proceeded through the intersection of Seneca Road and Route 70A, he noticed in his rearview mirror that two of the four motorcycles that had been stopped at that intersection were now behind him. Beers alleges that the lead motorcyclist, i.e. Grinols, was weaving in and out of his lane, and accelerating and decelerating, sometimes coming dangerously close to Beers's vehicle. Beers alleges that he thought that Grinols may have been drunk.2 Beers admits what Grinols claimed, that he rolled through a four-way stop without coming to a stop, but claims that he did so because he was afraid that Grinols's motorcycle would hit his vehicle if he stopped.

According to Beers, Grinols soon passed him, in a no-passing zone. Beers gave chase and closed in on him, turning on his high beams in an effort to get plaintiff's license plate number. Beers testified at his deposition that at some point during this episode, "the cop [in him] kind of kicked in, like, I got to get this," until his wife reminded him that their children were in the car. Beers Depo. (Dkt. #41-8) at 255.

Beers states that Grinols then abruptly came to a stop, and Beers did as well. Fink soon arrived and pulled up next to Beers's vehicle.

While the two sides’ accounts of what happened next differ in some particulars, it is clear that Grinols got off his motorcycle, took a few steps toward the SUV, and both he and Beers began shouting at each other. Both sides appear to agree that Grinols's girlfriend, McLaughlin, then pointed out to him that there were children in the back seat of Beers's vehicle, and persuaded him to leave. Grinols got back on his motorcycle, and he, Fink and Beers all drove away. But that did not end the matter, because of Beers's subsequent actions.

Beers made a phone call when he got home, to the North Hornell State Police barracks. Beers spoke to Trooper Matt Brewer (who is not a party to this action) and told him about the incident. Apparently Brewer took no immediate action to follow up on Beers's report.3

The next day, July 16, Beers went to work at the Bath State Police barracks, where he was stationed. He reported the incident again, this time to his sergeant. Investigator Donald Rodbourn was assigned to the case.

At around 11:00 that same morning, July 16, Grinols left his house in his vehicle (it seems to have been a pickup truck, but it was definitely not his motorcycle) with a passenger. Soon afterwards, he was pulled over by Trooper Devon Dunn, a co-worker of Beers, who was on patrol duty that morning.

Though they differ on some of the details, the parties’ accounts of what happened next are generally consistent with each other. Dunn, who like Beers was stationed at the Bath State Police barracks, knew that Grinols was a "person of interest" in connection with an ongoing investigation, i.e. , the investigation into Beers's report that he had made that morning. How much Dunn knew about the investigation, or whether he knew that it was Grinols's vehicle that he was pulling over is unclear but ultimately of little importance here; at some point during this encounter, Dunn became aware that the driver of the vehicle was Grinols, i.e. , the person of interest mentioned above.

Dunn issued Grinols a ticket for driving without a front license plate. This was the first of several charges lodged against Grinols. Dunn also told Grinols that Grinols was the subject of an investigation and that Grinols could either drive directly to the State Police barracks in Bath to speak to Investigator Rodbourn, or be placed under arrest. Not surprisingly, Grinols chose the former option.

Dunn allowed Grinols to drop off his passenger, but followed Grinols on the way to the State Police building. On the way there, he again pulled Grinols over and issued him another ticket, for using a cell phone while driving. Plaintiff admits that he was on his phone, but claims that he had placed the call (to his lawyer) before pulling away from the curb, and that he was using his phone's Bluetooth or speaker, i.e. , hands-free, which is permitted in New York.

Grinols did speak with Rodbourn later that day, but after being advised of his Miranda rights, Grinols stated that he did not want to proceed further until after he had consulted a lawyer. On July 18, Grinols's then-attorney called Rodbourn and told him that Grinols was willing to go to the State Police barracks for an interview.

Grinols and his girlfriend, McLaughlin, arrived there later that afternoon. They gave their accounts of what had happened on July 15, but declined to sign a written statement. Apparently Grinols's lawyer was unable to attend, but Grinols waived his right to have an attorney present.

After further investigation and consulting with Steuben County District Attorney ("DA") Brooks Baker, on or about August 8, 2014 Rodbourn charged plaintiff with three felonies–Reckless Endangerment in the First Degree, Unlawful Imprisonment in the First Degree, and Falsifying Business Records in the First Degree–and one misdemeanor, Endangering the Welfare of a Child. Grinols was arrested, arraigned and released after agreeing to participate in the pretrial release program.

In the felony complaints, Rodbourn alleged that Grinols: (1) committed reckless endangerment by intentionally stopping his motorcycle in the northbound lane of Airport Road in order to cause Beers to abruptly stop his vehicle, which created "a grave risk of death" to the occupants of that vehicle, as well as to Grinols's...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • Powell v. City of Jamestown
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of New York
    • 3 June 2022
    ... ... an underlying constitutional violation in which the defendant ... officer failed to intervene.” Grinols v ... Beers, 532 F.Supp.3d 95, 109 (W.D.N.Y. 2021) (quoting ... Walker v. City of New York, No ... 11-CV-00314(CBA)(JMA), ... ...
  • Davis-Guider v. City of Troy
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of New York
    • 29 March 2023
    ... ... violation remains to support a failure-to-intervene claim ... This claim is therefore dismissed as well.” Grinols ... v. Beers , 532 F.Supp.3d 95, 108-09 (W.D.N.Y. ! ... 2021) ...          Plaintiff ... also alleges the ... ...

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT