Cardoza v. City of New York, 139 A.D.3d 151

May 30, 2008, officers Perez, Mendez, and Tomala confronted Cardoza for public drinking and open container; arrest followed after he did not produce ID and allegedly resisted.
Surveillance video and trial testimony depict a brief struggle; Mendez struck Cardoza's hand with a baton and pepper-sprayed him during the arrest.
Cardoza claimed language barriers and non-resistance; the video showed resistance by Cardoza at times and the officers claimed he resisted and grabbed a fence.
Civil trial evidence included medical and psychiatric experts; Cardoza alleged permanent hand injury and posttraumatic stress disorder from the incident.
Jury found excessive force by Mendez, false information by Perez leading to malicious prosecution, and awarded compensatory and punitive damages totaling $4 million.
Trial court set aside the malicious prosecution verdict and punitive damages, ordered new damages trial, and reduced pain-and-suffering awards; appellate panel later reinstated the verdicts and ordered new damages awards with reductions.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Probable cause and malice in malicious prosecution	Cardoza asserts lack of probable cause and actual malice via false statements to prosecutors.	Defendants contend probable cause or proper framing of charges and lack of malice negate the claim.	Malicious prosecution claim reinstated; probable-cause issue properly inferred from false-information finding.
Punitive damages viability and measurement in § 1983	Punitive damages warranted for reckless indifference and malice; awards supported by record.	Punitive awards excessive and not properly tied to the § 1983 claims.	Punitive damages reinstated but reduced to $75,000 each.
Excessiveness of pain-and-suffering awards	Jury awards for past and future pain and suffering are compensable under § 1983 claims.	Awards deviate materially from reasonable compensation based on injuries and PTSD.	Remitted pain-and-suffering awards; Court approved reductions to $400,000 past and $1,250,000 future, subject to stipulation.
Attorney’s fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988	Prevailing party entitlement to reasonable attorneys' fees.	No ruling or moot issue as to fees at trial.	Remanded for a determination of reasonable attorneys' fees; no mandatory denial.

Broughton v. State of New York, 37 N.Y.2d 451 (N.Y. 1975) (elements of malicious prosecution)
Cohen v. Hallmark Cards, 45 N.Y.2d 493 (N.Y. 1978) (set aside verdict—weight of the evidence vs. legal insufficiency)
Colon v. City of New York, 60 N.Y.2d 78 (N.Y. 1983) (probable cause standard for prosecution)
Nardelli v. Stamberg, 44 N.Y.2d 500 (N.Y. 1978) (actual malice may be inferred; circumstantial evidence allowed)
Martin v. City of Albany, 42 N.Y.2d 13 (N.Y. 1977) (actual malice inference from lack of probable cause; jury inferences)
O'Neill v. Krzeminski, 839 F.2d 9 (2d Cir. 1988) (punitive damages in § 1983 cases for excessive force)
Lee v. Edwards, 101 F.3d 805 (2d Cir. 1996) (excessive punitive damages for false reporting)
Ismail v. Cohen, 899 F.2d 183 (2d Cir. 1990) (punitive award review for malicious prosecution/assault)
King v. Macri, 993 F.2d 294 (2d Cir. 1993) (punitive damages in police misconduct cases reviewed)
Pinto v. Gormally, 109 A.D.3d 425 (1st Dept 2013) (jury awards for pain and suffering affirmed/reduced precedents)
Diouf v. New York City Tr. Auth., 77 A.D.3d 600 (1st Dept 2010) (hand/arm injuries and damages awards context)