Wilson v. City of New York, 90 CV 3983.

• Decision Date: 04 September 1992
• Docket Number: No. 90 CV 3983.,90 CV 3983.
• Citation: 800 F. Supp. 1098
• Parties: Ija WILSON, Plaintiff, v. The CITY OF NEW YORK, the New York City Police Department, and Police Officer J. Clifford, Shield No. 25100, Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Eastern District of New York

800 F. Supp. 1098

Ija WILSON, Plaintiff, v. The CITY OF NEW YORK, the New York City Police Department, and Police Officer J. Clifford, Shield No. 25100, Defendants.

No. 90 CV 3983.

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

September 4, 1992.

Eugene Bogan, New York City, for plaintiff.

O. Peter Sherwood, Corp. Counsel City of New York, (Deborah A. Bryant, of counsel), for defendants.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

NICKERSON, District Judge:

Plaintiff Ija Wilson brought this action against the City of New York, the New York City Police Department, and Police Officer Joseph Clifford pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983, 1985 and 1986, seeking compensatory and punitive damages for false arrest, use of excessive force, and malicious prosecution. Defendants move for summary judgment.

I.

For purposes of this motion the court treats as true the sworn deposition testimony of plaintiff and resolves all ambiguities and draws all reasonable inferences in her favor. Montana v. First Federal Savings & Loan Assoc., 869 F.2d 100, 103 (2d Cir. 1989).

Plaintiff is a 52 year old woman, slightly over five feet tall with a hunchback. She lives in an attached house on Cherry Avenue in Flushing, New York, which has a driveway immediately adjacent to that of her neighbor.

On November 19, 1989 plaintiff's friend Inna Solomone drove to plaintiff's house to visit, and parked her car in the street across the entrance to the driveway. The car partially blocked the driveway of plaintiff's neighbor, but with his consent.

Another of plaintiff's neighbors, Mr. Gandi, came to plaintiff's house to tell her that he had called the police to complain that a car was blocking his own driveway. He wished to warn plaintiff that the police "in their enthusiasm" might ticket the car of plaintiff's friend.

Defendant Joseph Clifford and his partner, Officer James Duckham, responded to the complaint of a blocked driveway on Cherry Avenue and parked their car approximately 20 feet from plaintiff's house. Officer Clifford began issuing a summons to a car parked there.

Plaintiff, accompanied by Solomone, approached the patrol car, bent over toward Clifford, pointed toward Solomone's car, and explained that it belonged to her friend who had parked in front of her driveway with her permission.

According to plaintiff, Clifford did not respond. Plaintiff repeated her explanation. After a pause, Clifford told her that it was against the law to park in front of a driveway. Plaintiff informed Clifford that that law had been lifted several years earlier. Plaintiff's tone was, according to Solomone, "very cutesy, cute, very polite" and "very apologetic." Clifford took offense and asked plaintiff whether she was trying to teach him the law.

Plaintiff grew frustrated and annoyed. She told him she was not trying to argue with him. She merely wanted to "talk to him" and "inform him about something," but he was "on some kind of ego trip."

According to Clifford, plaintiff said "you expletive deleted — you better not give this car a ticket."

Solomone, not wanting to create any problems, announced that she would move her car and walked towards it. Concerned that Solomone would not find a spot nearby and would have to walk back to the house alone at night, plaintiff walked toward her and yelled to her not to move the car. Plaintiff admits that as she walked away from Clifford, she muttered an obscenity.

Solomone got into her car, and as she pulled away Clifford approached her and said he "could arrest" plaintiff for "pulling the law on me" and using obscenities. Solomone then drove away.

As plaintiff walked back to her house, Clifford yelled after her that she could get arrested for what she had done. According to Clifford, plaintiff turned around, made an obscene gesture, and shouted additional obscenities. Clifford also says in his affidavit that at this point he told plaintiff she was under arrest, and that by this point "a crowd of approximately 5 or 6 people gathered nearby."

Plaintiff then entered her house and told her husband that "the cops are outside." Her husband, a black Jamaican-American, walked outside the house. Fearful and "panicked" that her husband "was taking a chance walking out there" with the police, plaintiff followed him.

Plaintiff's husband asked the police officers what had happened. Clifford got out of the car, pointed to plaintiff, and said she had been very rude. Plaintiff's husband identified the woman as his wife, and asked plaintiff to tell him what happened. While relating what had happened, plaintiff repeated the obscenity she had stated when she had walked away from Clifford's car. At that point, Clifford announced "that's it" and said that he was going to "teach her a lesson."

Clifford does not mention this conversation in his affidavit. He says that he tried to arrest her immediately after she reappeared outside.

When Clifford went to arrest plaintiff, Clifford's partner Officer Duckham said "you can't be serious." But Clifford reached toward plaintiff and grabbed her sweater. She panicked and started running up the stairs to her house. Clifford ran after her, grabbed her by the sweater, and dragged her down the stairs.

At this point, plaintiff's daughter had walked outside and was crying, and several neighbors had gathered in front of the house.

Clifford had trouble handcuffing plaintiff. He says she was resisting arrest. At one point he "raked" her arm against the brick stoop. Clifford insists that plaintiff was scraped because she pressed her body against the stoop while resisting arrest.

According to plaintiff and Solomone, who had reparked her car and returned, Clifford had plaintiff against a brick wall and was twisting her arm, trying to force it behind her back. At her deposition Solomone described the scene as "really horrible." She said the following:

Because, okay, Ija is deformed. She has a hump back, and he was pulling her arms behind her. She was saying, `He's hurting me....' And I said, `Look, can't you see her hands can't do that? What are you doing to her? ...' And he just kept, I don't know, ... twisting, twisting her hands behind her and her hands wouldn't go that way.... And I went hysterical. I said `Please let go of her. What are you doing to her? ...' He said, `Oh, I'll teach her a lesson.'

Plaintiff testified at her deposition that while Clifford was handcuffing her, Officer Duckham walked upstairs, stood beside them, and "said in a very low voice, you are not going to do this are you or you are not going through with this, are you." Officer Clifford said nothing, and called for a backup. Several more police cars then arrived.

Clifford stated in his affidavit that throughout the incident plaintiff's husband was "peaceful and cooperative." He did not try to interfere with the attempt to arrest plaintiff. When he saw that additional police officers had arrived, plaintiff's husband said to Solomone "thank God" and greeted the officers with relief. He pointed out what Clifford was doing to his wife, but then fell silent when one of the policemen approached him with a stick. After that point he could not see everything that happened to his wife because, as he explained at his deposition, he was "busy trying to take care of himself" upon being "surrounded" by a number of police officers with nightsticks.

When Clifford was finally able to put the handcuffs on plaintiff, he dragged her into a car and drove her to the precinct. By this time, according to plaintiff, she was bleeding all over her wrists and arms. Her husband recalled that her lip was also bleeding.

In spite of her injuries plaintiff declined an offer of medical treatment from "two EMS guys" who were "making fun" of "some poor black woman ... who was busted for prostitution." Plaintiff was afraid to go with them to the hospital.

Clifford issued plaintiff a summons for disorderly conduct and told plaintiff he would release her after seeing her identification. When Solomone brought plaintiff's driver's license to the precinct, plaintiff was allowed to leave. The summons was eventually adjourned in contemplation of dismissal.

Plaintiff went home that evening and took photographs of her wrists and bruises. Her hands were swollen and her hands and arms were covered with "huge patches" of "black and blue." The next day she saw her own doctors, who took x-rays but found no broken bones, and prescribed aspirin and Ben-Gay.

The complaint states claims for violations of plaintiff's civil rights based on false arrest, excessive force, and malicious prosecution, and alleges that the City of New York failed to train and supervise adequately their employees. It demands judgment against the defendants in the amount of one million dollars plus costs and reasonable attorneys' fees.

II.

Plaintiff's claims are governed by 42 U.S.C. § 1983, which provides in pertinent part that:

every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom or usage of any State ..., subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen ... to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured.

To state a § 1983 claim against Clifford plaintiff must allege that acting under color of state law he deprived her of a federal right.

To prevail on a § 1983 claim against New York City for acts committed by Clifford, plaintiff must show that those acts were pursuant to an official policy or custom. Monell v. Department of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658, 694, 98 S.Ct. 2018, 2037-2038, 56 L.Ed.2d 611 (1978). Plaintiff must also establish a "causal link" between the official policy or custom and her injuries. Batista v. Rodriguez, 702 F.2d 393, 397 (2d Cir.1983).

Plaintiff has neither identified a specific municipal policy, custom or usage that was inadequate, nor shown how that policy, custom or usage caused the alleged constitutional violation. The § 1983 claim against New York City is...