190 F. Supp. 3d 229
D. Mass.2016Background
- On July 29, 2012 Bruce Bazinet was suicidal and was later involuntarily committed under Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 123, § 12 after a ~3-hour police standoff; his wife Lori interacted with officers afterward.
- Lori completed and signed a 209A abuse prevention order (APO) application while speaking with Paxton Chief Robert Desrosiers, Paxton Detective Forrest Thorpe, and State Police Major Francis Leahy; Lori later testified she was coerced into doing so to keep Bruce hospitalized.
- Thorpe prepared a “voluntary” statement and an incident report recounting that Bruce pointed a gun at Lori and that Lori feared for her life; Lori says the signed statement did not reflect the truth and she signed under pressure.
- An emergency APO issued that night; Bruce was served at the hospital and was later arrested and charged with violating the APO and assault and battery with a dangerous weapon; charges were eventually nolle prossed.
- Plaintiffs sued Thorpe, Desrosiers, and Leahy asserting § 1983 and state civil‑rights (MCRA) claims, IIED, supervisory liability, and defamation; the three remaining defendants moved for summary judgment and the court denied those motions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Thorpe/Desrosiers fabricated evidence / procured a coerced APO, violating due process (§ 1983) | Thorpe and Desrosiers coerced Lori into a false APO and false statements that formed the basis for Bruce’s arrest | Defendants say Lori voluntarily completed the APO and there was probable cause (APO violation) supporting arrest; no fabrication | Denied summary judgment; factual disputes (coercion/false report; whether APO violation occurred) preclude immunity dismissal |
| Whether MCRA liability attaches for threats/intimidation/coercion | Officers coerced Lori to file APO and sign statement, interfering with rights by threats/intimidation/coercion | Defendants argue no threats/intimidation/coercion occurred | Denied summary judgment; a jury could find coercion sufficient for MCRA liability |
| Supervisory liability against Desrosiers for Thorpe’s alleged misconduct | Desrosiers participated in or acquiesced to scheme to keep Bruce hospitalized and to the false report | Desrosiers contends he had no role in Thorpe’s report or procurement of APO | Denied summary judgment; disputed evidence could show Desrosiers’ involvement/acquiescence |
| IIED claim against all three officers | Fabricating charges against a mentally ill person and coercing Lori to file a false APO caused severe emotional distress | Defendants say conduct not sufficiently extreme/outrageous and plaintiffs’ distress not shown | Denied summary judgment; factual disputes could support IIED given allegations of framing and coercion |
| Defamation claim against Thorpe | Thorpe authored and disseminated a false police report and APO materials imputing criminal conduct to Bruce | Thorpe argues newspapers—not him—published defamatory material | Denied summary judgment; police report/packet itself is publication to third parties and factual disputes remain |
Key Cases Cited
- Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 (qualified immunity standard for public officials)
- Ashcroft v. al‑Kidd, 563 U.S. 731 (qualified immunity gives officials room for reasonable but mistaken judgments)
- Limone v. Condon, 372 F.3d 39 (fabrication of evidence by law enforcement violates due process)
- Devenpeck v. Alford, 543 U.S. 146 (probable cause for one offense can justify arrest even if officer cites another)
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (summary judgment burden allocation)
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, 477 U.S. 242 (summary judgment: genuine dispute and materiality standards)