Selvaggio v. Patterson

• Decision Date: 18 March 2015
• Docket Number: No. 13–CV–2436 NGGRML.,13–CV–2436 NGGRML.
• Citation: 93 F.Supp.3d 54
• Parties: Christina A. SELVAGGIO, Plaintiff, v. Police Officer Anaida PATTERSON, Police Officer Robin Lestrade, Sergeant Walsh, and the City of New York, Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Eastern District of New York

93 F.Supp.3d 54

Christina A. SELVAGGIO, Plaintiff

v.Police Officer Anaida PATTERSON, Police Officer Robin Lestrade, Sergeant Walsh, and the City of New York, Defendants.

No. 13–CV–2436 NGGRML.

United States District Court, E.D. New York.

Signed March 18, 2015.

Filed March 20, 2015.

Christina A. Selvaggio, Staten Island, NY, pro se.

Rosemari Y. Nam, New York City Law Department, New York, NY, for Defendants.

MEMORANDUM & ORDER

NICHOLAS G. GARAUFIS, District Judge.

Pro se Plaintiff Christina A. Selvaggio brings this action against three employees of the New York City Police Department (“NYPD”)—Police Officer (“P.O.”) Anaida Patterson, P.O. Robin Lestrade, and Sergeant Walsh (collectively, the “Individual Defendants”)—and the City of New York (the “City”). Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, she asserts claims of false arrest, excessive force, and municipal liability in connection with her April 6, 2012, arrest.¹ Defendants have moved for summary judgment on all claims. For the reasons explained below, Defendants' motion is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.

I. BACKGROUND

A. Facts

Except as otherwise noted, the following facts are undisputed. Where facts are in dispute, the courts credits Plaintiff's version of the facts.²

On December 6, 2011, Plaintiff's husband, Larry Mansour (“Mansour”), filed a domestic incident report against Plaintiff (the “2011 DIR”).³ (Decl. of Rosemari Y. Nam in Supp. of Defs.' Mot. for Summ. J. (“Nam Decl.”), Ex. A (Dkt. 37–1); see also Defs.' Rule 56.1 St. (“Defs.' 56.1”) (Dkt. 36) ¶ 1; Pl.'s Rule 56.1 St. (“Pl.'s 56.1”) (Dkt. 41) at ¶ 1.) In the 2011 DIR, Mansour stated that Plaintiff “accused me of stealing her [truck and mailbox] keys and of giving said keys to a person named Phyllis March.” (2011 DIR at 3.) He asserted that he was “harassed and treated with mental cruelty on a daily basis.” (Id. ) He further stated that Plaintiff “has our window screens bolted shut and a special lock on our front & back door that you ... cannot open without the key. I do NOT have a key. She often goes out & locks me in so I can't ‘sneak out.’ ” (Id. (emphasis in original).) The 2011 DIR states that no arrest was made, and gives as a reason: “no offense committed.” (Id. at 1.) The reporting officer for the 2011 DIR was non-party Damon Plonczynski; the 2011 DIR also indicates that it was reviewed by non-party Vincent DeMarco on December 7, 2011, and that on December 13, 2011, Defendant Sergeant Thomas Walsh signed off on the report.⁴ (Id. at 2.)

On April 2, 2012, Mansour filed a second domestic incident report against Plaintiff (the “2012 DIR”). (Nam Decl., Ex. B (Dkt. 37–2); see also Defs.' 56.1 ¶ 5; Pl.'s 56.1 ¶ 5.) In the 2012 DIR, Mansour reported that Plaintiff accused him of sneaking his “alleged ‘mistress' ” into his bedroom, “even though [Plaintiff] has the key to a dead bolt lock which locks both from the inside and the outside and of which I have no control over and in spite of the fact [Plaintiff] has all the screens on all the windows screwed-shut to disallow their being able to be opened ....” (2012 DIR at 3.) The 2012 DIR states that Mansour was “fearful,” and that Plaintiff had a history of abusing drugs or alcohol (see id. at 1); however, at his deposition, Mansour testified that he was never asked such questions by the reporting officer. (Mansour Dep. (Dkt. 48–2)⁵ at 45:5–21, 47:1–12.) The 2012 DIR further states that no arrest was made, and gives as a reason: “no offense committed.” (2012 DIR at 1.) The reporting officer for the 2012 DIR was again non-party Damon Plonczynski; the 2012 DIR also indicates that it was reviewed by Defendant P.O. Anaida Patterson on April 5, 2012, and that Sergeant Walsh signed off on the report on April 6, 2012. (Id. at 2.) The 2011 and 2012 DIR forms that Mansour signed provide that “False Statements [ ] are punishable as a Class A Misdemeanor, pursuant to section 210.45 of the Penal Law.” (Defs.’ 56.1 ¶ 7; Pl.'s 56.1 ¶ 7; 2011 DIR at 3–4; 2012 DIR at 3.)

Plaintiff had filed her own DIR against Mansour the previous day, on April 1, 2012 (“Pl.'s DIR”). (Decl. of Christina A. Selvaggio in Opp'n of Defs.' Mot. for Summ. J. (“Selvaggio Decl.”), Ex. 6 (Dkt. 42–6); see also Pl.'s Mem. in Opp'n (“Pl.'s Opp'n”) (Dkt. 43) at 6.)⁶ In Plaintiff's DIR, she stated that she and Mansour had a “verbal dispute,” and Mansour “pushed her out of the room” and “slammed her right elbow and robe in door” while closing the door. (Pl.'s DIR.) Mansour avers that the purpose of the 2012 DIR, which he filed the day after Plaintiff's DIR, was “merely ... to give my side of the story. In addition, I wanted to tell them why we fought the night before, which was because of allegations of cheating. I wanted them to know that I can't possibly be cheating ....” (Mansour Aff. (Selvaggio Decl., Ex. 7 (Dkt. 42–7)) at 1; see also Pl.'s Opp'n at 8.) He writes that he “made [this purpose of the 2012 DIR] clear to Officer Plo[nc]zynski.” (Mansour Aff. ¶ 1.)

When Mansour went to the precinct to file the 2012 DIR, Plaintiff followed after him in order to file yet another complaint against Mansour, regarding an incident that had occurred that morning, during which “Mansour was yelling and cursing at my Mother and he tried to bum rush her, as well.” (Pl.'s Opp'n at 7.) Plaintiff further alleges that while she and Mansour were at the precinct on April 2, 2012, apparently yelling at each other (see id. at 8), P.O. Plonczynski shouted: “ ‘[S]hut up, shut the ‘F’ up and get a divorce already, stop filing hundreds of complaints.' ” (Id. at 8; see also Mansour Dep. at 27:17–28:9 (“Officer [Plonczynski] was screaming at the top of his lungs ... and with a face wrenched with anger. Shut the fuck up. Stop coming in here and filing all these—stop coming in here and filing hundreds of complaints.... I'm tired of all this fuckin' bullshit. This has to fuckin' stop.”); Mansour Aff. at 6.) Mansour asserts that Sergeant Walsh also said to him: “ ‘She's a F—k—g psycho. You look like a smart guy, get rid of her. Just move out. Don't pay the mortgage. Let her ... live in the street.’ ” (Mansour Aff. at 6; see also Mansour Dep. at 29:8–22.) Mansour claims that he responded to Sergeant Walsh's comments by affirming his love for Plaintiff and Plaintiffs right to question him and his loyalty. (See Mansour Aff. at 6.) After they completed filing their respective complaints, Plaintiff and Mansour returned home. (Pl.'s Opp'n at 8.)

Four days later, on April 6, 2012, Defendants Patterson, Walsh, and Lestrade arrived at Plaintiff's residence. (Defs.' 56.1 ¶ 8; Pl.'s 56.1 ¶ 8.) Walsh asked if the officers could enter the home, and Plaintiff and/or Mansour allowed them inside. (See Compl. (Dkt. 1) at 1.) Walsh observed screws in the window screens, a lock on the back door, and a dead bolt lock on the front door; he photographed all three.⁷ (Defs.' 56.1 ¶¶ 9–10, 12; Pl.'s 56.1 ¶¶ 9–10, 12; see also Evid. Photos. (Nam Decl., Ex. E (Dkt. 37–5)).) At the time, the key to the front door dead bolt lock was placed in the lock. (See Evid. Photos; Pl.'s 56.1 ¶ 10.) Sergeant Walsh asked Plaintiff whether Mansour had a key to the locks, and she stated that he did not. (Defs.' 56.1 ¶ 11; Pl.'s 56.1 ¶ 11; Compl. at 2.) Plaintiff alleges that when Walsh asked this question, she explained that Mansour did not have a key “ ‘only because he don't want one and I only lock it when we all go out.’ ” (Compl. at 2.) In his deposition, Mansour testified that he confirmed Plaintiff's statement. He informed Sergeant Walsh: “I don't have a copy of the key because I told my wife I don't want a copy of the key. I don't need a copy of the key. We lock it when we go out and I don't need it.” (Mansour Dep. at 48:10–13.) Mansour also testified that he explained to Walsh the purpose of the screws in the window screens: “I made it clear to him, I said they were put there by [Plaintiff's] friend because they were streaking—they weren't solid. They weren't firm within there. They could fall out. Bugs coming in. We did it to stop bugs from coming in and the ones downstairs we did it so people can't come in and bugs, too. It's harder to break in through the second floor but the ground floor very very easy.” (Id. at 47:18–25.)

Mansour also told Walsh that he did not want Plaintiff to be arrested. (Def. Sgt. Walsh's Resp. & Obj. to Pl.'s Interrogs. (Selvaggio Decl., Ex. 9 (Dkt. 42–9)) at 9 (Obj. & Resp. to Interrog. No. 19); Mansour Aff. ¶ 3.) In his affidavit, Mansour states, “I pleaded with Sergeant Walsh that I did not file a complaint against my wife for false imprisonment because I'm not falsely imprisoned,” and “I pleaded with him not to arrest [Plaintiff], because that's not what I reported, or, what I wanted.” (Mansour Aff. ¶ 3; see also Mansour Dep. at 34:2–10 (“I said ... I filed a complaint that my wife accused me of adultery. I said my wife was not guilty of false imprisonment. My wife didn't commit a crime. My wife sh[oul]d not be arrested. I do not want her to be arrested. It was my intent to give my version of the story. I said my wife should not be arrested.... I said my wife did nothing at any time without my knowledge and without my approval.”).) However, Defendants contend that when Plaintiff was no longer present, Mansour stated that he “was fearful of [P]laintiff and has no way to leave the house.”⁸ (Def. Sgt. Walsh's Resp. & Obj. to Pl.'s Interrogs. at 9 (Obj. & Resp. to Interrog. No. 19).)

After Walsh informed her that she was about to be arrested, Plaintiff went upstairs to change her clothing, and she was accompanied by Patterson. In her deposition, Plaintiff testified that Patterson “whispered to me and Larry, ... ‘I am sorry, it is not me, it is him, it is my boss,’ and she is pointing at Thomas [Walsh].” (Selvaggio Dep. at 23:15–18; see also Mansour Aff. ¶ 4; Compl. at 1–2 (“[S]he whispered to Larry and I that it wasn't the State that was doing it, it was her boss Sergeant Walsh, who wants it.”).) Patterson told them Plaintiff would “be coming home...