Agwanhu v. City of New York
2025 NY Slip Op 30841(U)
N.Y. Sup. Ct., New York Cty.2025Background
- Plaintiff, Obrian Agwanhu, was a NYPD officer who was arrested in 2020 for a domestic incident and ultimately pled guilty to a violation, with all related records sealed under NY law.
- NYPD initiated internal disciplinary proceedings, during which sealed criminal records were admitted without a warrant, and plaintiff was ultimately forced to resign following the ALJ's recommendation for termination.
- Plaintiff filed suit alleging the use of sealed arrest records in his disciplinary hearing constituted arrest history discrimination under New York State and City Human Rights Laws, as well as violations of sealing statutes.
- Defendants (City of New York and ALJ Paul Gamble) moved to dismiss the complaint on various grounds, including judicial immunity for Gamble and failure to state a claim against the City.
- Plaintiff sought monetary damages, not injunctive relief, and specifically challenged disparate treatment compared to other similarly situated officers.
- The City's motion to dismiss invoked procedural defenses (capacity, statute of limitations) and substantive arguments (termination based on conduct, not arrest).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Judicial immunity for ALJ Gamble | Gamble not immune as NYPD lacked jurisdiction under Civil Service Law, not Admin Code. | Judicial immunity applies; actions taken within jurisdiction of ALJ. | Gamble dismissed on immunity. |
| Sufficiency of arrest history discrimination | Facts pled support discrimination: sealed records used, adverse action, disparate impact. | Termination based on conduct, not arrest; records not fully protected. | Sufficiently pled, claim survives. |
| City’s procedural dismissal (capacity, SOL) | City failed to specify or prove lack of capacity/time barred. | Capacity/statute of limitations bar claim. | City’s arguments rejected. |
| Remedy/procedural vehicle (Article 78 vs. action) | Proper to sue for damages in a plenary action, not just vacatur/Article 78. | Required to bring Article 78 proceeding; four-month limitation applies. | Plenary action proper, not barred. |
Key Cases Cited
- Leon v. Martinez, 84 N.Y.2d 83 (standard for motion to dismiss under CPLR 3211(a)(7))
- Guggenheimer v. Ginzburg, 43 N.Y.2d 268 (motion to dismiss standard: cause of action discerned from pleading)
- Tarter v. State, 68 N.Y.2d 511 (absolute judicial immunity for judges)
- Montella v. Bratton, 93 N.Y.2d 424 (power to discipline NYPD officers governed by NYC Admin Code § 14–115, not CSL § 75)
- Koerner v. State, 62 N.Y.2d 442 (plaintiffs may bring discrimination claims as plenary actions, not limited to Article 78)