Torcivia v. Suffolk County, New York

Decision Date09 November 2021
Docket NumberAugust Term, 2020,Docket No. 19-4167
Citation17 F.4th 342
Parties Wayne TORCIVIA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SUFFOLK COUNTY, NEW YORK, Police Officer James Adler, individually and professionally, Police Officer Philip Halpin, individually and professionally, Police Officer Robert Verdu, individually and professionally, Mary Catherine Smith, individually, Kristen Steele, individually, Dianna D'Anna, individually, Adeeb Yacoub, M.D., individually, Defendants-Appellees, Investigator Thomas Carpenter, individually and professionally, Captain William Scrima, individually and professionally, Police Officers John Doe 1 & 2, individually and professionally, who responded to Plaintiff's home at 60 Creighton Avenue, Lake Ronkonkoma, New York with Officer Adler around 12:00 a.m. on April 6, 2014, Police Officers John DOE 3 & 4, individually and professionally, who confiscated Plaintiff's weapons from his home on April 6, 2014, Police Officers John Doe 5-15, individually and professionally, Bridget Walsh, individually, Michelle Sanchez, individually, Timothy J. Aiello, individually, John and Jane Does 1-10, individually, Defendants.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit

Amy L. Bellantoni, The Bellantoni Law Firm, PLLC, Scarsdale N.Y., for Plaintiff-Appellant Wayne Torcivia.

Arlene S. Zwilling (Dennis M. Cohen, on the brief), Office of the Suffolk County Attorney, Hauppauge, N.Y., for Defendants-Appellees Suffolk County, New York, Police Officer James Adler, Investigator Thomas Carpenter, Captain William Scrima, Police Officer Philip Halpin and Police Officer Robert Verdu.

David Lawrence III, Office of the New York Attorney General, New York, N.Y., for Defendants-Appellees Dianna D'Anna, Kristen Steele, and Adeeb Yacoub, M.D.

Scott Christesen, Fumuso, Kelly, Swart, Farrell, Polin & Christesen LLP, Hauppauge, N.Y., for Defendant-Appellee Mary Catherine Smith.

Before: Cabranes, Lynch, and Carney, Circuit Judges.

Carney, Circuit Judge:

The primary issue presented by this appeal concerns the boundaries of the Fourth Amendment's prohibition on warrantless seizures.

Shortly after midnight on April 6, 2014, Suffolk County police officers came to the home of Plaintiff-Appellant Wayne Torcivia in response to what was described to them as a violent domestic incident. They were dispatched following Torcivia's teenaged daughter's call to an emergency hotline. After arrival and an initial assessment of the situation, the officers determined that Torcivia needed to be transported to a mental health facility for evaluation. Later the same day, they seized firearms from his home pending further investigation. Torcivia sought damages from the County, arguing that the officers acted pursuant to an official County policy or custom that violated the Fourth Amendment. We conclude that the District Court correctly determined that the County's policy falls within the "special needs" exception to the Fourth Amendment's warrant requirement, and that, on the facts presented here, actions taken under the County's policy did not violate Torcivia's Fourth Amendment rights.

Torcivia further contends that certain evidentiary rulings made at trial on his remaining claims against three County police officers were erroneous. He also challenges the District Court's determination that employees of the State-run mental health facility (and an intern supervised by them) were entitled to qualified immunity under federal and New York law for claims related to their alleged failure to discharge Torcivia promptly from the facility. On review, we find no basis for reversal or a new trial on any of these grounds.

BACKGROUND
I. Factual history

We recite the facts as set forth by the District Court in its ruling on summary judgment and based on the partiesRule 56.1 submissions, deposition testimony, and exhibits to their Rule 56 cross-motions. As described below, the parties differ substantially as to the circumstances of Torcivia's transport to and his discharge from the State mental health facility. The events at issue were the subject of deposition testimony and testimony adduced at trial.1

A. The police response at Torcivia's home

Just before 1:00 a.m. on Sunday, April 6, 2014, the Suffolk County Police Department broadcast a call for officers to respond to what the dispatcher described as "a violent, domestic dispute of a 17-year-old female and an intoxicated father." App'x at 981. The request for police presence was made in response to a telephone call made sometime after midnight by Torcivia's daughter, Adrianna, attempting to reach the Suffolk County Department of Social Services’ Child Protective Services ("CPS") through a Nassau County-based social service hotline that she dialed from the family home in Ronkonkoma, New York.2 County Police Officers James Adler, Robert Verdu, and Patrick Halpin responded to the call.

The parties disagree about what happened next. In sum, Torcivia testified that, although he "drank a few cocktails" that evening, App'x at 1270, and was having a dispute with Adrianna related to her guinea pig, he was in control of himself. He heard Adrianna making a phone call but could not tell with whom she was speaking. Not much later, the doorbell rang. After he answered the door, Officers Adler and Halpin entered the house, a split-level ranch home. Officer Verdu, who arrived after the others, remained on the front stoop. While Officer Halpin went to speak with Adrianna on the house's lower level, Officer Adler remained on the landing just inside the front door. According to Torcivia, Officer Adler's shoulder then brushed against curtains on the front door window, causing them to fall. Torcivia stated that when he went to pick up the curtains from the floor, Officer Adler told him to get back, using a profanity. Torcivia further testified that he told Officer Adler that swearing was not allowed in his house, and an altercation between them ensued, during which Officer Adler "screamed," swore at Torcivia, and threatened to use a taser on him. Appellant's Br. at 5. To the alleged threat, Torcivia responded in part, "I wouldn't do that, I have a heart condition. I could die." Id. (citing App'x at 417, 1206-07). Officer Adler then consulted with Officer Verdu, who proposed that they transport Torcivia to Stony Brook University Hospital's Comprehensive Psychiatric Emergency Program Unit ("CPEP"), a local emergency mental health service run by New York State.3 The officers then did so, handcuffing Torcivia first.4

The County Defendants (that is, Suffolk County and Officers Adler, Halpin, and Verdu) present a different account of the facts at issue. When the County Officers arrived at the house, Torcivia was in a highly agitated state: He would "jump up, yell, and scream," calm down, and then "explode again and start ranting and raving and screaming and flailing his arms." App'x at 1420-1421 (testimony of Officer Halpin); see also id. at 394, 1477 (testimony of Officer Adler). Torcivia was "intoxicated and threatening and belligerent" towards Adrianna, id. at 517, and "immediately aggressive" towards the police, id. at 1477 (testimony of Officer Adler). Officer Adler had a brief conversation with the individual working at the Nassau County hotline about Adrianna's call. According to Officer Adler, that individual told him that she could hear Torcivia "screaming at [Adrianna and] saying horrible things to her over and over again." Id. at 1464. Officer Adler further testified that, throughout their conversation, Torcivia was upset and "would stand up and clench his fists and get loud." Id. at 1470.

According to the officers, it was Officer Adler, not Officer Halpin, who went to speak with Adrianna on the house's lower level. Then, when Officer Adler returned to the upper level of the house to ask about the incident involving Adrianna and her guinea pig, Torcivia was said to declare, "All right. That's it. I want you guys to tase me. I have a heart condition. If you [t]ase me, it will kill me. Please [t]ase me and kill me." Id. at 1471 (testimony of Officer Adler); see also id. at 1477 (same).5 Officers Halpin and Verdu corroborated this testimony. See id. at 193 (testimony of Officer Verdu); id. at 1432 (testimony of Officer Halpin) ("Mr. Torcivia said he had enough and then again he said that he wanted us to taser him so that he could die."). According to the officers, this behavior and Torcivia's statements led them to conclude that they should transport Torcivia to CPEP for psychological evaluation. See, e.g. , id. at 193 (Officer Verdu describing Torcivia's request to be tased as "the magic phrase, the phrase that got him to the point where we needed to have him evaluated").

B. Torcivia's emergency psychological evaluation at CPEP

At about 2:00 a.m., Officer Adler arrived with Torcivia at CPEP.6 There, he was evaluated by a CPEP team that included Dr. Adeeb Yacoub, psychiatric nurse practitioner Dianna D'Anna, and social worker Kristen Steele (together, the "State Defendants").7 Unpaid CPEP intern Mary Catherine Smith ("Intern Smith"), then age 65 and a master's student in Stony Brook University's social work program, was shadowing Steele and assisted the State Defendants at times during their evaluation of Torcivia.

In a measurement taken by the CPEP team at about 2:50 a.m., almost two hours after police arrived at his home early Sunday morning, Torcivia's blood alcohol level was found to be 152 mg/dL: "approximately double the legal limit ... for driving a motor vehicle." App'x at 519.8 Because CPEP policy does not permit its staff to conduct more than cursory evaluations of admitted persons until they are sober, the State Defendants first let Torcivia sleep. Then, beginning shortly after 2:00 p.m. on Sunday, they conducted a series of interviews with him comprising the formal evaluation.

C. Seizure of Torcivia's firearms and Torcivia's CPEP discharge

After transporting Torcivia to CPEP—but still in the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
65 cases
  • Belyea v. The City of Glen Cove
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of New York
    • 22 Agosto 2022
    ...or custom that (2) cause[s] [the plaintiff] to be subjected to (3) a 63 denial of a constitutional right.” Torcivia v. Suffolk County, 17 F.4th 342, 354-55 (2d Cir. 2021) (quoting Wray v. City of New York, 490 F.3d 189, 195 (2d Cir. 2007)); Lucente v. County of Suffolk, 980 F.3d 284, 297 (2......
  • Klein v. Lakeview Fire Dist.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of New York
    • 26 Septiembre 2022
    ... ... No. 21-cv-1468 (KAM)(JMW) United States District Court, E.D. New York September 26, 2022 ...           ... MEMORANDUM AND ... of Hempstead, County of Nassau, State of New York ... ( Id. ¶ 11.) The Fire District ... a right is clearly established.” Torcivia v ... Suffolk Cnty., New York , 17 F.4th 342, 367 (2d Cir ... ...
  • Donohue v. Hochul
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York
    • 23 Febrero 2022
    ... ... No. 21-CV-8463 (JPO) United States District Court, S.D. New York February 23, 2022 ... OPINION AND ORDER ... plaintiff]'s constitutional rights, ” Torcivia ... v. Suffolk Cty., New York , 17 F.4th 342, 363 (2d Cir ... ...
  • Alvarado v. United Hospice, Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York
    • 27 Septiembre 2022
    ...construe the record evidence in the light most favorable to the non-moving party and draw all reasonable inferences in its favor.” Torcivia, 17 F.4th at 354; see also Horror v. Miller, 15 F.4th 232, 240 (2d Cir. 2021) (same). “It is the movant's burden to show that no genuine factual disput......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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