156 A.3d 418
R.I.2017Background
- Bainum repeatedly visited a nursing-home resident, Michael Koczan, despite staff and a police officer (Desisto) asking her to leave and a later no-trespass notification; she was later convicted of willful trespass.
- On October 16, 2009, Desisto asked Bainum to leave at the center’s request; she complied. Center staff informed her that Koczan’s daughter wanted visits stopped.
- On January 23, 2010, Bainum visited again disguised by a wig; staff recognized her and the department charged her with willful trespass. She was convicted by a jury in Superior Court and sentenced (one-year suspended, probation, and no-contact order). Her direct appeal was withdrawn.
- In August 2013 Bainum sued the Coventry Police Department, alleging (1) perjured testimony by Officer Desisto about a no-trespass warning on Oct. 16 and (2) altered police reports — asserting a collusion/conspiracy that led to her criminal conviction.
- The department moved for summary judgment arguing collateral estoppel, that the conviction established probable cause defeating malicious prosecution, and qualified immunity; the motion justice granted summary judgment for defendant.
- Bainum appealed pro se; the Supreme Court reviewed de novo and affirmed, holding the underlying malicious-prosecution/conspiracy claims fail as a matter of law given the conviction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Bainum may pursue malicious prosecution / conspiracy based on alleged perjury/altered reports | Bainum: evidence (affidavits, documents) shows Desisto lied and reports were altered; this supports malicious prosecution and conspiracy/collusion | Coventry PD: criminal conviction establishes probable cause; underlying tort fails, so conspiracy claim fails; collateral estoppel/raise-or-waive/party defects apply | Held: Malicious-prosecution fails because conviction establishes probable cause and the criminal case did not terminate in Bainum’s favor; conspiracy fails as derivative of a failing tort; summary judgment affirmed |
| Whether a false-arrest claim exists | Bainum argued collusion/conspiracy; she did not clearly press false arrest | Coventry PD: no arrest occurred; criminal charge and conviction were proceeds of lawful process | Held: Motion justice correctly treated there was no false-arrest claim (no arrest alleged) |
| Whether collateral estoppel bars Bainum’s claims | Bainum: collateral estoppel inapplicable because department was not party to prior criminal case and conspiracy wasn't litigated | Coventry PD: events underlying civil claims overlap with matters litigated/crystallized in criminal case | Held: Court concluded the conviction conclusively established probable cause and that collateral effects precluded relitigation of those elements as to the dept. |
| Whether the Police Dept. is the proper defendant | Bainum proceeded against the department | Dept.: motion justice and Court note proper defendant is the Town of Coventry, not the department (a municipal subdivision) | Held: Court observed Bainum herself suggested improper party; case could have been disposed for failure to join proper municipal defendant but decided on merits; judgment affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Providence Journal Co. v. Rhode Island Department of Public Safety ex rel. Kilmartin, 136 A.3d 1168 (R.I. 2016) (summary-judgment standard and de novo appellate review)
- Beacon Mutual Insurance Co. v. Spino Brothers Inc., 11 A.3d 645 (R.I. 2011) (summary-judgment standard articulated)
- Read & Lundy, Inc. v. Washington Trust Co. of Westerly, 840 A.2d 1099 (R.I. 2004) (civil conspiracy requires valid underlying tort)
- Hill v. Rhode Island State Employees’ Retirement Board, 935 A.2d 608 (R.I. 2007) (elements and heightened proof required for malicious prosecution)
- Soares v. Ann & Hope of Rhode Island, Inc., 637 A.2d 339 (R.I. 1994) (malice and lack of probable cause standard in malicious-prosecution cases)
- Horton v. Portsmouth Police Department, 22 A.3d 1115 (R.I. 2011) (conviction establishes probable cause defeating malicious prosecution)
- Dyson v. City of Pawtucket, 670 A.2d 233 (R.I. 1996) (probable cause defeats malicious-prosecution claim)
- Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (U.S. 1994) (malicious-prosecution requires prior proceeding terminated in plaintiff’s favor)
- Peters v. Jim Walter Door Sales of Tampa, Inc., 525 A.2d 46 (R.I. 1987) (proper municipal-party pleading; town vs. department distinction)