Garay v. Liriano
2012 WL 898446
D.D.C.2012Background
- Garay and her minor daughters were arrested in their DC apartment on April 14, 2010 after police arrived with the property manager’s help.
- Officers Liriano and Sarita allegedly requested Wilson to open the door; Wilson opened it, and arrests followed.
- Plaintiffs allege the misdemeanor arrest for simple assault lacked probable cause.
- Plaintiffs sue Wilson and Van Metre Columbia Uptown Apartments along with others for §1983, false arrest, IIED, malicious prosecution, invasion of privacy, and trespass.
- District and officers answered; Wilson and Van Metre moved to dismiss certain counts, which the court partially granted and partially denied.
- Court addresses Rule 12(b)(6) standards and whether Wilson and Van Metre may be liable under state-law theories despite the federal claims against other defendants.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| §1983 color-of-law against Wilson | Garay alleges Wilson acted with others to enable the arrest. | Wilson argues no willful participation; not a state actor. | §1983 claim against Wilson dismissed. |
| IIED against Wilson and Van Metre | IIED claim seeks severe emotional distress from door-opening incident. | Conduct not outrageous; falls short of extremity required. | IIED claims dismissed against Wilson and Van Metre. |
| Invasion of privacy (intrusion upon seclusion) | Entry into apartment by Wilson constitutes intrusion. | Not challenged as trespass; some facts disputed. | Intrusion claim may proceed against Wilson. |
| Trespass to land and entry | Wilson entered the apartment; improper entry invades possession. | Allegations negate volitional invasion or entrance by Wilson. | Trespass claim may proceed; Wilson entered behind officers. |
Key Cases Cited
- West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42 (1988) (establishes two-part §1983 framework and color-of-state-law analysis)
- Twombly v. Bell Atlantic Corp., 550 U.S. 544 (2007) (plausibility standard for pleading plausible claims)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S. Ct. 1937 (2009) (pleading must show plausible entitlement to relief)
- Harvey v. Plains Township Police Dept., 421 F.3d 185 (3d Cir. 2005) (private party may be liable if willful participation with state actor)
- Lugar v. Edmondson Oil Co., 457 U.S. 922 (1982) (joint participation requirement for state action)
- Chukinas v. United States, not provided (not provided) ( cited for willful participation concept)
- Harvey v. Plains Township Police Dept., 421 F.3d 185 (3d Cir. 2005) (willful participation standard for private actors with police)
- Morgan v. Barry, 12 F. App’x 1 (D.C. Cir. 2000) (trespass standard - unauthorized entry)
- Bettis v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 315 F.3d 325 (D.C. Cir. 2003) (outrageous conduct standard involves extreme decency)