Ackerson v. City of White Plains
702 F.3d 15
| 2d Cir. | 2012Background
- Ackerson was arrested on Nov 8, 2007 in White Plains for third-degree menacing after approaching a woman in her driveway and asking questions; the arrest followed police reports and a purported fear by the complainant.
- Fottrell (White Plains) directed the arrest based on Fisher’s briefing and the complainant’s statements that Ackerson’s conduct caused fear, though the complainant did not testify to being physically threatened.
- Ackerson was prosecuted and arraigned; the information was later dismissed for failing to establish third-degree menacing.
- Ackerson filed § 1983 actions for false arrest and malicious prosecution against Fisher and Fottrell, and a Monell claim against the City of White Plains, plus state-law false-arrest claims against all defendants.
- The district court granted summary judgment for the City on Monell, dismissed the White Plains Police Bureau, and denied other motions; the district court later granted qualified-immunity-based dismissal.
- On appeal, the Second Circuit vacated, reversed in part, affirmed in part, and remanded for partial summary judgment on liability for state-law false arrest and § 1983 false-arrest claims, while affirming Monell dismissal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Probable cause for arrest | Ackerson lacked probable cause for third-degree menacing. | Fisher/Fottrell had probable or arguable probable cause based on the complainant’s fear and surrounding facts. | No probable or arguable probable cause existed for third-degree menacing. |
| Qualified immunity | Officers are not entilted to qualified immunity where no probable cause exists. | Officers may have arguable probable cause; qualified immunity applies if reasonable officers could disagree. | District court erred; no arguable probable cause; qualified immunity not warranted. |
| State-law false arrest and city liability | State-law false arrest claims should survive; City liable under respondeat superior for state-law false arrest. | No state-law false arrest liability given probable cause/qualified immunity. | Ackerson entitled to partial summary judgment on state-law false-arrest claims; City liable under state-law theory. |
| Monell claim and malicious prosecution | Monell claim should not be dismissed and malicious-prosecution claims may survive. | Monell claim properly dismissed; malicious-prosecution claims foreclosed. | Monell claim affirmed; malicious-prosecution claims dismissed. |
| Remand/partial grant of judgment | Partial judgment should be granted in Ackerson’s favor on liability. | Maintains district court decisions on various defenses. | Remand to grant partial summary judgment on liability for state-law false arrest and for § 1983 false arrest; reverse related defenses. |
Key Cases Cited
- Weyant v. Okst, 101 F.3d 845 (2d Cir. 1996) (probable cause standard for § 1983 false arrest)
- Jaegly v. Couch, 439 F.3d 149 (2d Cir. 2006) (focuses on probable cause as to the arresting charge)
- Zellner v. Summerlin, 494 F.3d 344 (2d Cir. 2007) (probable cause as a threshold for arrest)
- Wallace v. City of Albany, 283 A.D.2d 872 (3d Dept. 2001) (probable cause for arrest need not prove the specific offense)
- People v. Whidbee, 803 N.Y.S.2d 20 (N.Y. Crim. Ct. 2005) (verbal threats alone insufficient without physical menace)
- Tolbert v. Queens College, 242 F.3d 58 (2d Cir. 2001) (proceeds in evaluating dismissed, related concerns)
- Frank v. United States, 78 F.3d 815 (2d Cir. 1996) (posture on qualified immunity framework)