Allen Bernard Shay v. County of Los Angeles
2:15-cv-04607
C.D. Cal.Jun 5, 2017Background
- Allen Shay, a licensed real estate broker, was arrested after Deputy Christopher Derry sought and obtained a state arrest warrant based on an investigation into refinancing on a property purchased by Eddie Turner; Turner was later convicted of fraud.
- Investigation showed: counterfeit bank statements faxed from Shay & Associates, a $29,916.43 cashier’s check tied to Shay’s personal HELOC, and other documentary evidence; Shay denied purchasing the check.
- Deputy Derry submitted a Warrant Application (including his declarations and supporting documents) to a state judge; the judge issued the warrant and a prosecutor filed charges and an ex parte bail-hold motion under Cal. Penal Code § 1275.1.
- Shay was arrested, jailed eleven days, later released on bail, and the preliminary hearing judge declined to hold Shay to answer the charges (while holding Turner to answer).
- Shay sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment claims), California’s Bane Act (Cal. Civ. Code § 52.1), a Monell claim against the County/LACSD, and state false imprisonment; defendants moved for summary judgment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Fourth Amendment — Probable cause for arrest warrant / false Warrant Application | Shay: Warrant Application lacked probable cause; contained false or misleading statements (judicial deception); arrest and press release defamatory. | Derry: Warrant Application contained ample facts; warrant was facially valid; prosecutor and neutral judge reviewed and approved; qualified immunity applies. | Court: Warrant Application provided a substantial basis for probable cause; even if close, qualified immunity applies. No liability for judicial deception or defamation. |
| 2. Fourteenth Amendment — Prolonged post-arrest incarceration and malicious prosecution | Shay: Derry submitted false declaration to impose no-bail hold, causing 11-day incarceration; malicious prosecution. | Derry: Filing bail-hold declaration followed county practice and California law (§ 1275.1); prosecutor independently reviewed and filed charges; no evidence of malice or coercion to overcome Smiddy presumption. | Court: No due-process violation; bail hold lawful; Smiddy presumption not rebutted; summary judgment for defendants on malicious prosecution. |
| 3. Equal Protection | Shay: He was treated differently (arrested) than white participants (e.g., Gleason) due to race. | Derry: Shay and Gleason not similarly situated; no evidence of discriminatory motive. | Court: No genuine issue; defendants entitled to judgment. |
| 4. Monell, Bane Act, and False Imprisonment (municipal and state claims) | Shay: LACSD had a custom of filing boilerplate bail-hold declarations; arrest/jail violated state rights and Bane Act; false imprisonment for unlawful detention. | County/LACSD: No municipal policy or final policymaker actions; conduct lawful under state procedures; officer immunity and probable cause. | Court: Monell claim fails (no custom or constitutional violation); Bane Act claim fails (no separate state constitutional violation); false imprisonment barred by officer immunity and probable cause. |
Key Cases Cited
- Malley v. Briggs, 475 U.S. 335 (officer protected when warrant reasonably sought)
- Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223 (qualified immunity framework)
- Saucier v. Katz, 533 U.S. 194 (qualified immunity two-step analysis)
- Ashcroft v. al-Kidd, 563 U.S. 731 (clearly established law specificity)
- Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (probable cause totality-of-the-circumstances)
- KRL v. Estate of Moore, 512 F.3d 1184 (officer reliance on warrants and qualified immunity)
- United States v. Stanert, 762 F.2d 775 (judicial deception / omissions)
- Hervey v. Estes, 65 F.3d 784 (substantial showing standard for Franks-type judicial deception claim)
- Baker v. McCollan, 443 U.S. 137 (Fourteenth Amendment due process and liberty interests)