MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER
Hon. Norman A. Mordue, Senior United States District Judge:
INTRODUCTION
In this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (“section 1983 ”), plaintiff Melanie Mayes and her son, plaintiff Brian Mayes, Jr., born in 1994, claim that their Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable search and seizure were violated by defendants Assistant Police Chief Harold McClellan (“Chief McClellan”) and Patrolman Keith Johnson (“Officer Johnson”), both of the Police Department of the Village of Hoosick Falls (“Village”). Plaintiffs' claims of unreasonable entry and search of their residence and unreasonable seizure of Brian Mayes' person arise from an incident occurring on November 8, 2012, when, in response to a 911 dispatch, Chief McClellan and Officer Johnson went to the residence at 31 Lyman Street in Hoosick Falls, New York, where Melanie Mayes and Brian Mayes lived with Robert Sanderson, Jr. (“Sanderson”), Melanie Mayes' fiancé. Plaintiffs also assert state law claims of assault, battery, and intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress.
Defendants move for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 41). As explained below, the Court grants the motion and dismisses the action in its entirety with prejudice.
The amended complaint (Dkt. No. 25) alleges the following facts:1
9. Plaintiff Melanie Mayes is the mother of Plaintiff Brian Michael Mayes, Jr, who was 17 years old when the events giving rise to this Complaint occurred. Brian is mentally disabled and receives SSI due to his disability.
10. On or about November 8, 2012, Brian was at his home, located at 31 Lyman Street, Hoosick Falls, playing with a friend when two policemen called out to him through an open window. One officer was dressed in a Hoosick Falls Police uniform, and the other in plainclothes. These officers were later identified by the Plaintiffs as being Defendants Keith Johnson and Harold McClellan (the “Individual Defendants”).
11. The Individual Defendants asked Brian if someone had called 911 from a land-based phone line. Brian replied negatively and explained that his home did not have a land-based phone line.
12. The Individual Defendants became angry and started banging on the front door.
13. Brian ran downstairs and one of the officers kicked the door open into his face, causing damage to the door.
14. One Defendant, likely Defendant Keith Johnson, grabbed Brian, pushed and handcuffed him, and then shoved him into a couch. He then dragged Brian out the front door and onto the porch, where he continued to shove and strike Brian.
15. In his report, Defendant Johnson detailed that Brian Mayes was arrested “while inside, PTL Johnson saw 2 white males, and both were asked to provide identification. Neither male could provide photo identification, but one male gave his name as Brian Mayes, Jr., and the other gave his name as [M.S.]. When asked, neither individual could state what they were doing inside the house, or what they were doing when they said don't answer the door it's the police. Both subjects were placed in handcuffs, and detained in police vehicles.” A copy of Patrolman Johnson's report is attached to this Amended Complaint as Exhibit A.
16. Mr. Mayes lived in the home, and committed no crime. Mr. Mayes could not provide photo identification because, upon information and belief, he did not have any. [M.S.] was his invited guest in the home. Even a basic inquiry by Defendant Johnson would have revealed these facts. Common sense would further detail that individuals do not dial 911 when committing a burglary. Officer Johnson had no warrant to arrest Mr. Mayes in his home, nor did he have a warrant to enter the home.
17. Brian was eventually dragged into a police cruiser, still handcuffed.
18. Neither officer explained why Brian had been arrested or why they had forcefully entered his home.
19. At this point, Ms. Mayes awoke from the noise downstairs. She saw the Individual Defendants outside her bedroom and demanded to know why they were inside her home. They stated that someone had called 911 from a land-based phone line.
20. Ms. Mayes stated that they had no such phone line and ordered them to leave the premises. She immediately noticed that she did not see Brian and asked the Individual Defendants where her son was.
21. The Individual Defendants ran downstairs and Ms. Mayes followed, yelling that her son was disabled and demanding to know where he was. She followed the officers outside and continued to ask for her son.
22. At this point, Ms. Mayes heard her son weeping and yelling for his mother, and she saw Brian locked in the backseat of the police cruiser, handcuffed and crying. Ms. Mayes demanded that her son be released. The Individual Defendants agreed, let Brian out of the car and removed his handcuffs.
23. Brian began crying louder in pain and Ms. Mayes noticed red, raised welts on his wrists and bruises on his forearms.
24. Shortly after, Ms. Mayes took Brian to Southwestern Vermont Medical Center, where he was treated for wrist contusions and abrasions. He was also diagnosed with peripheral neuropathy.
25. When they returned home several hours later, they noticed that their home had been searched in their absence. Specifically, Brian's bedroom had been searched and Ms. Mayes recreation room had been forcibly unlocked and sealed bins inside had been opened and searched. At no time did the Individual Defendant produce a warrant to enter or search the Mayes home. Upon information and belief, no such warrant exists.
26. As a result of the assault and “arrest” by Hoosick Falls Police Officers, Brian has suffered physical injuries, together with psychological trauma.
Officer Johnson's incident report, cited in paragraph 15 of the amended complaint and attached thereto as Exhibit A, states:
On the above date and time, units were dispatched to the above location for a report of a 911 open line. RCBES also advises that they can hear things in the background, and believe that their may be a burglary going on at that address. Upon arrival, PTL Johnson knocked on the front door of the residence, and their was no answer. PTL Johnson knocked multiple times, and their was no answer. Shield 2 received a phone call from RCBES stating that their are people in the house, and that they are saying that the police are here. RCBES also states that it sounds like the people were trying to break into a lock. While standing at my patrol vehicle, PTL Johnson observed a white male standing in the window, and the male opened the window. PTL Johnson requested that they come down stairs so they could be interviewed. A short time later, the front door to the residence opened, and upon request, the subjects allowed PTL Johnson inside the residence. While inside, PTL Johnson saw 2 white males, and both were asked to provide identification.
Neither male could provide photo identification, but the one male gave his name as Brian Mayes Jr., and the other gave his name as [M.S.]. When asked, neither individual could state what they were doing inside the house, or what they were doing when they said don't answer the door its the police. Both suspects were placed in handcuffs, and detained in the police vehicles. [Each] party was again questioned separately on what was going on, and why they weren't going to answer the door for the police, and neither would state what was going on. When advised that the reason the police were there was because of a 911 open line call. PI/B.M. Mayes states that his house doesn't have a home phone in it. He was then advised that it must have come from a cellular phone, and both parties stated they didn't have cell phones with them. PTL Johnson then entered the house to make sure the building was secured, and when inside on second in the hallway, PTL Johnson announced his presence, and a female came out of a bedroom stating that she was the owner of the house, and requested I leave the house immediately. PTL Johnson then left the house, and a short time later, PI/M.L. Mayes came outside, and requested to know what was going on. PTL Johnson then advised her of the situation, and that her son was being detained until the situation could be figured out. PI/M.L. Mayes then identified PI/B.M. Mayes as her son, and that he lives there. Both subjects were then released. It was discovered through the investigation, that PI/[M.S.] did possess a cell phone, and that the phone call came from his phone. He stated he didn't recall making the call, and was then advised that it could have dialed while it was in his pocket. PI/[M.S.] was advised by PI/M.L. Mayes that he was not welcome in her house, and PI/[M.S.] was transported to the station so he could find a safe place to go. Units returned to service. Incident CBI.
The amended complaint asserts the following causes of action:
First: Section 1983 claim by Brian Mayes against all defendants for unreasonable seizure of his person in violation of the Fourth Amendment;
Second: Section 1983 claim by Brian Mayes against all defendants for excessive force in violation of the Fourth Amendment;
Third: Section 1983 claim by Melanie Mayes and Brian Mayes against all defendants for unreasonable search of their residence in violation of the
...
