Staten v. Vill. of Monticello

• Decision Date: 26 October 2015
• Docket Number: No. 14-CV-4766 (KMK),14-CV-4766 (KMK)
• Parties: CLAUDE A. STATEN, Plaintiff, v. THE VILLAGE OF MONTICELLO, and THE TOWN OF THOMPSON SULLIVAN COUNTY, Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York

CLAUDE A. STATEN, Plaintiff, v. THE VILLAGE OF MONTICELLO,and THE TOWN OF THOMPSON SULLIVAN COUNTY, Defendants.

No. 14-CV-4766 (KMK)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

October 26, 2015

OPINION AND ORDER

Appearances:

Claude A. Staten

Middletown, NY

Pro Se Plaintiff

Alana R. Bartley, Esq.

Drake, Loeb, Heller, Kennedy, Gogerty, Gaba & Rodd, PLLC

New Windsor, NY

Counsel for Defendant

Kimberly Hunt Lee, Esq.

McCabe & Mack LLP

Poughkeepsie, NY

Counsel for Defendant

KENNETH M. KARAS, District Judge:

Pro se Plaintiff Claude A. Staten ("Plaintiff") filed the instant Complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981 and 1983 against the Village of Monticello ("Monticello") and the Town of Thompson in Sullivan County ("Thompson") (collectively, "Defendants"), alleging that he was "[a] victim of [r]ace discrimination, harassment, retaliation, [and] forging[, using, and faxing] official documents . . . ." (Compl. ¶ II.B (Dkt. No. 1).) Before the Court are Defendants' Motions To Dismiss the Complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). (Dkt. Nos. 16, 21.) For the reasons explained herein, Defendants' Motions are granted.

I. Background

A. Factual Background

The following facts are drawn from Plaintiff's Complaint and the documents attached thereto, and they are taken as true for the purpose of resolving the instant Motion. Plaintiff asserts that he is a "Black Hispanic male," who is a police officer employed by the New York City Police Department ("NYPD").¹ The conduct giving rise to this Action begins with an incident that occurred on July 26, 2006, at the Plaintiff's home in the Village of Monticello, in the Town of Thompson in Sullivan County. (Compl. ¶ III.C.12.) On that date, Plaintiff asserts that Sullivan County Deputy Sheriff Davis ("Davis") and, subsequently, New York State Police Trooper Belgiovene ("Trooper Belgiovene") responded to a domestic incident involving Plaintiff's "then common[-]law wife" Sherril Pressley ("Pressley"), a "Black Hispanic female," and another woman named Latasha Grove ("Grove"). (Id. ¶¶ III.C.12, 26.)² Plaintiff alleges that Davis investigated the incident and prepared a report that did not include any details finding Plaintiff to be at fault, though he did remove "two hand guns" from Plaintiff's home. (Id. ¶ III.C.16, 23.)

Following the incident, Plaintiff alleges that Davis's report, together with a second "forged report" that Davis also allegedly produced relating to the same incident, were "sent via fax . . . from the Sullivan County Sheriff's Department" to the 046 precinct of the NYPD, which is "[P]laintiff's command." (Id. ¶¶ III.C.11, 17-20; Pl.'s Monticello Opp'n 2 (Dkt. No. 25).)³ Plaintiff contends that the second report faulted Plaintiff for the domestic incident, indicating that Plaintiff struck Pressley while his children were watching, and concluded that the children were in danger given that this physical altercation had occurred with guns in the home. (Compl. ¶ III.C.19, 22.)⁴ Plaintiff also contends that, in August 2006, Sullivan County Child Protective Services arrived at Plaintiff's residence with a copy of the allegedly forged report, and that, in response, Pressley "presented a copy of the original . . . report," upon which both Pressley and a social worker immediately identified the differences between the reports. (Id. ¶ III.C.22.)

Plaintiff further alleges that, upon attempting to retrieve his handguns from the Sullivan County Sherriff's Department in September 2007, he was told by Lieutenant Boyd ("Boyd") that the Sheriff's Department "did what [Plaintiff's] department asked [it] to do." (Id. ¶ III.C.25.) Boyd allegedly stated that if Plaintiff was "going after anybody [he] better go after [his department in New York City], because [Sullivan County officers] [weren't] going to take a hit[] because of [Plaintiff] and [his] department," and that otherwise Plaintiff would not "be able to live [in Sullivan County]" anymore. (Id.) Plaintiff retrieved his guns, but when Plaintiff askedBoyd if he was "threatening" Plaintiff, Boyd replied, "You can take it however you want. Just take your guns and get out of here." (Id.)

Based on these allegations, Plaintiff asserts that "the Town of Thompson along with the Sullivan County Sheriff's Department . . . conspired to violate [his] civil and constitutional rights" when "members of the Sullivan County Sheriff's Department" did "knowingly and deliberately" fax forged documents to Plaintiff's employer, the NYPD, "with the intention[] of damaging, or ending, [Plaintiff's] career due to hatred[] of both [his] color and [] race." (Id. ¶ III.C.33.)

Several years later, on August 29, 2013, Plaintiff alleges that his wife Pressley was subject to racial discrimination during a motor vehicle accident, wherein she "struck a parked car" in foggy conditions, in the Village of Monticello. (Id. ¶¶ III.C.26, 34.)⁵ Plaintiff contends that Monticello Police Officer Jake Miller ("Miller"), a Caucasian, and, subsequently, Supervisor Corporal Davis ("Davis") responded to the scene of the accident. (Id. ¶ III.C.27.)⁶ Miller allegedly prepared an accident report, and Davis allegedly directed Miller to issue Pressley a speeding ticket, despite having "not witness[ed]" her driving, there being "no skid marks . . . present," there being "no electronic recording" of her speed, and there otherwise being no "effective[] determin[ation] [of the] speed traveled." (Id. ¶¶ III.C.28-29, 31.) Plaintiff assertsthat the ticket was issued "without [p]rima [f]acie cause . . . based on [Pressley's] race." (Id. ¶ III.C.34.)⁷

Plaintiff alleges that Pressley also suffered from subsequent harassment. (Id. ¶ III.C.32.) Specifically, Plaintiff contends that at 2:00 a.m. on December 5, 2013 Davis stopped Pressley in a McDonald's parking lot while she was driving a vehicle owned by Plaintiff. (Id.) During the stop, according to Plaintiff, Davis "never asked for documents," asked "who the vehicle was registered to[,]" and informed Pressley "the reason for the stop was because the vehicle exhaust was too loud[,]" then telling Pressley, "Just . . . get it fixed." (Id.)

Over the course of this seven-year period, Plaintiff further alleges that Thomas Belgiovene ("Officer Belgiovene"), a Thompson code enforcement officer, "harassed" him and "abused his authority in order to attack . . . [P]laintiff," namely by taking "part with the Town of Thompson[,] which was his employer[,] to prevent [Plaintiff], from expanding on, and building on[, his] property." (Id. ¶¶ III.C.13-14.)⁸ The alleged harassment consists of the following four incidents:

• First, Plaintiff alleges that in 2004, approximately one week after Plaintiff had constructed the second, and larger, of two sheds on his property, Officer Belgiovene ordered Plaintiff to tear it down "in a . . . forceful and intimidating voice," and that if Plaintiff did so, Officer Belgiovene would "leave [him] alone." (Pl.'s Thompson Opp'n 2 (Dkt. No. 26).) Officer Belgiovene ultimatelycapitulated, instructing Plaintiff to apply for a variance, which Plaintiff ultimately received in February 2005. (Id. at 3.)

• Second, Plaintiff alleges that in September 2007, he planned to build a garage on his property. (Id.) Upon seeking approval of his plans from Officer Belgiovene, who also served as the Assistant Building Inspector, Officer Belgiovene directed Plaintiff to have them certified by an architect. (Id. at 3-4.) When Plaintiff returned to Officer Belgiovene with the architect's approval, Officer Belgiovene instructed Plaintiff to add a fourth garage port, and then told Plaintiff that his proposed apartment above the garage was unacceptable, explaining that because Plaintiff did not "need anything like this," he was "going to disapprove it." (Id. at 4.) When Plaintiff threatened to go to the head Building Inspector, Thomas J. Brawley ("Brawley"), Officer Belgiovene told Plaintiff that he works with Brawley, who would "agree with what" Officer Belgiovene said, and that "the answer is no." (Id.) Plaintiff abandoned the project. (Id.)

• Third, Plaintiff alleges that on April 9, 2012, his wife was served on his behalf with an "appearance ticket."⁹ After appearing in court in connection with that appearance ticket, Plaintiff attended a May 11, 2012 Town Hall meeting, at which he was told by Town representatives that he "would be assisted with the construction issues with [his] garage." (Id. at 4-5.) To this end, Officer Belgiovene explained to Plaintiff that "the standards have changed," and thatPlaintiff's addition of a bathroom in connection with the apartment above his new garage would require a septic tank capacity increase. (Id. at 5.) Plaintiff accordingly agreed to "delete the additional bathroom" from his plans. (Id.) At that point, Town Attorney Paula Kay ("Kay") asked if Plaintiff had a variance for his smaller shed, which had been built in 1993. (Id.) Because Plaintiff did not have a variance, the Town required him to remove it, and Plaintiff complied. (Id. at 5-6.)

• Fourth, subsequent to these events, Plaintiff alleges that Officer Belgiovene "took part" in having Plaintiff's "property taxes excessively raised in a form of . . . attack on [him]." (Compl. ¶ III.C.15.)¹⁰

Additionally, Plaintiff also alleges, for the first time in his Opposition to Monticello's Motion, that his daughter, Cristal, a student at Monticello High School, was "attacked" and has "not been allowed to actively participate in team sports" at school because Plaintiff filed this action. (Pl.'s Monticello Opp'n 4.) While Plaintiff provides little detail as to when these attacks occurred or who he believes was responsible, he does allege that school officials told his daughter that Monticello and Thompson are "poor" and suffering because "of the action [Plaintiff] is taking against them." (Id.)

B. Procedural History

Plaintiff filed his Complaint on June 25, 2014, alleging that he was "a victim of race discrimination, harassment, retaliation, [and] for...