284 F. Supp. 3d 426
W.D.N.Y.2018Background
- On Aug. 17, 2013, RPD Officers Alexander Baldauf and Rickey Harris responded to a 911 call from Winnette Delancy concerning an argument with Dwayne Ivery at his residence; a physical altercation between Ivery and Baldauf ensued and was partially captured on low-resolution video.
- Baldauf and Harris subdued and arrested Ivery; he was charged with second-degree harassment and resisting arrest and later received an ACD (charges dismissed).
- Ivery sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and state law, alleging false arrest/illegal seizure, excessive force, conspiracy, municipal liability/failure to train (City and Chief Sheppard), assault, battery, emotional-distress, and negligence.
- Defendants moved for summary judgment seeking dismissal of various claims and asserting qualified immunity for the officers.
- The court denied summary judgment as to Baldauf on false arrest, excessive force, assault and battery (factual disputes and credibility issues); granted summary judgment dismissing all claims against Harris, the City, and Sheppard, and dismissed plaintiff’s conspiracy, emotional-distress, and negligence claims against Baldauf.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| False arrest (probable cause) | Ivery says Baldauf initiated unprovoked attack; no probable cause existed. | Baldauf/Harris say Ivery was aggressive, made contact, and officers had probable cause for harassment and resisting arrest. | Denied as to Baldauf (material factual disputes); dismissed as to Harris (no basis to conclude Harris had or needed independent probable cause). |
| Excessive force / assault & battery | Baldauf used unnecessary, repeated punches/kicks while Ivery was subdued. | Baldauf contends force was reasonably necessary to subdue an aggressive suspect. | Excessive-force and state assault/battery claims survive against Baldauf (credibility issues); dismissed as to Harris (no evidence he struck Ivery and he intervened). |
| Conspiracy under § 1983 | Ivery alleges Baldauf and Harris conspired to deprive his rights. | Defendants: claim is conclusory, no meeting-of-minds or overt acts in furtherance; intra-corporate doctrine bars it. | Dismissed (no concrete evidence of agreement; intra-corporate conspiracy doctrine applies). |
| Monell/supervisory liability (City, Sheppard) | Ivery points to alleged RPD indifference and prior cases to show policy/custom and Sheppard’s involvement. | Defendants: no policy/custom shown; Sheppard had no personal involvement beyond a promise to "look into" it. | Dismissed (no evidence of municipal policy or Sheppard’s personal involvement). |
| Qualified immunity (officers) | Ivery: officers violated clearly established rights. | Defendants: actions were objectively reasonable under the circumstances. | Qualified immunity supports dismissal as to Harris; for Baldauf, immunity not resolved at summary judgment because material fact disputes remain. |
Key Cases Cited
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (summary judgment standard)
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (movant may show lack of evidence to defeat nonmovant)
- Weyant v. Okst, 101 F.3d 845 (2d Cir.) (probable cause at summary judgment)
- Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (excessive-force objective reasonableness)
- Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 (qualified immunity standard)
- Monell v. Department of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658 (municipal liability under § 1983)
- Lennon v. Miller, 66 F.3d 416 (2d Cir.) (qualified immunity in false-arrest context)