Smalls v. Cnty. of Suffolk
| Decision Date | 27 August 2019 |
| Docket Number | Case No. 14-cv-4889 (SFJ)(AKT) |
| Parties | JOHN SMALLS, RENEE SMALLS, and MAURICE SMALLS, Plaintiffs, v. COUNTY of SUFFOLK, et al., Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of New York |
I. Introduction
Plaintiffs John Smalls ("John" or "Father"), Renee Smalls ( "Mother"; together with John or Father, the "Parents"), and Maurice Smalls ("Maurice"; collectively with John and Mother, the "Plaintiffs") commenced this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Defendants County of Suffolk ("County"), Deputy Sheriff Investigator Sargent John Della Rocca ("Della Rocca"), Deputy Sheriff Investigator Michael Rapp ("Rapp"), Deputy Sheriff Investigator Eugene Brosnan ("Brosnan"), Deputy Sheriff Investigator Gerard McGarty ("McGarty"; together with Della Rocca, Rapp, Brosnan, the "Investigators"1), Police Officer Steven Caparelli, s/h/a Steven Capelli ("Caparelli"), Police Officer Sabastian Lankewicz, s/h/a Sabastian Lankiewicz ("Lankewicz"), Police Officer Scott Lewis ("Lewis"; together with Caparelli, Lankewicz, the "Officers"2), and Detective Michael Maresca ("Maresca") (collectively, the Defendants),alleging, inter alia, various violations of their constitutional rights arising out of the entry into their home on two occasion by the Investigators acting pursuant to a Warrant of Arrest with a Writ of Attachment issued by a Family Court judge and, by Maurice, a claim of use of excessive force in connection with one of the Investigators' home entries. (See generally Complaint ("Complaint")(ECF No. 1).) Presently before the Court is the County's motion seeking summary judgment in its favor on all of Plaintiff's claims (hereafter, the "Summary Judgment Motion") (see ECF No. 41; see also Mem. in Supp. ("Support Memo") (ECF No. 41-10)), which the Plaintiffs oppose (hereafter, "Opposition" or "Opp'n")(ECF No. 41-16). For the reasons that follow, the County's Motion is GRANTED.
II. Background
The Parents have a daughter,4 Kwateria Smalls (hereafter, Daughter"), who is the mother of Jazarah Smalls Kelly (hereafter, "Child"), the Parents' granddaughter. (See Rule 56.1 Counter, ¶3; John's Affidavit (Ex. 1).) The Parents were seeking custody of the Child and, as such, "were the Petitioners in a Custody/Visitation Petition naming [Daughter] as respondent together with the [C]hild's father . . . , which was the genesis of [relevant] family court litigation [(hereafter, the "Family Court Action"]." (Id., ¶1.) As part of that Action, on May 9, 2013, the Family Court judge issued a "Warrant of Arrest with a Writ of Attachment," which authorized the arrest of Daughter and directed that the Child "be delivered to the Family Court, or if the Court was not in session, then into the custody of Suffolk County Child Protective Services" (hereafter, the "Warrant"). (Rule 56.1 Statement, ¶¶2, 3; see also Warrant (Ex. A).) The Warrant listed 83 Fillmore Avenue, Deer Park, New York 11729 (hereafter, the "WarrantAddress," "Fillmore Home" or "House") as the Daughter's address (see id., ¶4), and was filed with the Suffolk County Sheriff's Department the same day. (See id., ¶5.)
When the Warrant was issued, Della Rocca "was the Commanding Officer of the Suffolk County Sheriff's Department Warrant Squad [(hereafter, "Warrant Squad")]," which is tasked with enforcing warrants "at the direction of the Court and pursuant to Court orders . . . ." (Id., ¶¶6, 7.) A corresponding investigation file was opened that day (hereafter, the "Investigation File"). He assigned the Warrant to Rapp and Mullings, the two officers who comprised the abuse and neglect section of the Warrant Squad (see id. at 5:12-23); McGarty and Bronson also worked on enforcing the Warrant. (See Rule 56.1 Statement, ¶10.) None of the Investigators were aware that the Parents were adverse parties to Daughter in the Family Court Action or that Father had informed the Family Court that Daughter no longer lived at the Warrant Address in the Fillmore House. (See id., ¶¶45-46.)
On May 9, 2013, Rapp and Mullings went to the Warrant Address, which is also where the Plaintiffs live, and knocked on the door; after receiving no response, a business card was left at the House. (See id., ¶ 16; cf., Rule 56.1 Counter, ¶16 (); see also John's §50-h Hr'g Tr. (Ex. E.), at 5:5-14; Maurice's §50-h Hr'g Tr. (Ex. F.), at 5:10-17).) Also on that date, Della Rocca, Rapp, Mullins and McGarty went to a State Island location to follow up on information that Daughter and Child may be there; however, neither was found at that location. (See id., ¶19.)
On May 14, 2013, Rapp and Mullins returned to the Warrant Address; again, they received no response to their knock on the door of the House. (See id., ¶20.) Immediatelythereafter, the two Investigators "canvassed the surrounding area, knocking on doors up and down the street." (Id., ¶21.) During that canvassing, Rapp spoke with a woman, who wished to remain anonymous, but informed Rapp that she would see the Daughter at the Fillmore House on weekends, and she had seen the Daughter recently. (See id., ¶22.) Rapp did not note this in the Investigation File.
On Saturday, May 18, 2013 (see Della Rocco Depo. Tr., 71:5-6, 98:4-7), based upon information that the Daughter had recently been seen on weekends at the Warrant Address, Della Rocca, Rapp, Mullins, and McGarty went to the Fillmore House at approximately 8:00 a.m. (See Rule 56.1 Statement, ¶23.) After no response to a knock on the front door, Investigators went around to the back of the House and entered it through a sliding glass door, approximately three inches ajar. (See id., ¶¶25-27; see also ¶34 (); cf., Rule 56.1 Counter, ¶26 ().) After announcing their presence (see Della Rocca Depo. Tr., 794-8), the Investigators conducted a search of approximately 15-minutes, searching three bedroom that had closed, locked doors, looking for Daughter and Child. "Two of the locked doors did not have door moldings and entrance was accomplished by spreading the door jambs allowing the door to open," and the other door "was opened with a credit card or pocket knife slid between the jamb and the door." (Id., ¶¶30-31.) There is no dispute that no one was foundin the Fillmore House. Upon the Investigators leaving the House, the sliding glass door was locked; Della Rocca believed he left a business card before leaving the Fillmore House. (See id., ¶42; but, cf., 56.1 Counter, ¶42 ().)
Unbeknownst to the Investigators, a neighbor who lived behind the Warrant Address recorded a video on his cell phone of the Investigators' entering the house. (See id., ¶33.) Thereafter, John viewed the video a day or two later, after returning to the Fillmore House from an out-of-state trip. (See id., ¶¶34-36.) Thereafter and although believing the persons in the video were police officers, John "called 911 to report a burglary of his home." (Id., ¶37.) (Hereafter, the "Burglary Complaint".) Suffolk County police responded to the Burglary Complaint, sending a police car to the Warrant Address. (See id., ¶38.) "Suffolk Police detectives came to [the Warrant Address], watched the video, took photographs and dusted and lifted prints." (Id., ¶40.) On May 20, 2013, having been made aware of the Burglary Complaint, Della Rocca "called the Suffolk County Police to inform them that the Sheriff's Investigators were the persons that entered the [Fillmore H]ouse in connection with [the Warrant]." (Id., ¶41.) Thereafter, the Burglary Complaint was closed. (See Suffolk County P.D.'s Burglary Report, included in Investigation File (Ex. D.) at 31.)
John testified at his §50-h Hearing that before May 18, 2013, while rushing to leave the Fillmore House, he left five hundred dollars ($500.00) in cash on top of the bedspread in his and Renee's bedroom. (See John's §50-h Hr'g Tr., 45:2-19.) He further stated, that while he usually kept money in the House, he did not generally leave it out in the open. (See id., at 54:4-13.) Based solely on John's §50-h testimony, the Plaintiffs dispute the Investigators' claims that (1) they did not remove "any U.S. Currency from the house at 83 Fillmore Avenue on May 18,2013", and (2) John has no proof to back up his claim that the Investigators took money from his bedroom during the May Attempt. (See Rule 56.1 Counter, ¶¶43-44 (citing John's §50-h Hr'g Tr., 44-48).) Competent evidence shows: John waited more than twenty-four (24) hours before reporting the alleged missing money (see Suffolk County P.D.'s Burglary Report, included in Investigation File at 29-30); John testified that he installed a lock on his bedroom door in response to Daughter having stolen jewelry and money from that room (see id., 55); and, Della Rocca testified that, in a May 20, 2013 conversation with John, Della Rocca informed John there was no money on John's bed in response to John claiming money was missing from the bed (see Della Rocca Depo. Tr., 151:22-152:10).
To continue reading
Request your trial