Lewis v. City of New York, 591 F. App'x 21

Plaintiff Jonathan Lewis was indicted by a Queens County grand jury, tried, and ultimately acquitted; he then sued the City and individual officers under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and New York law.
Lewis alleged malicious prosecution, violation of the right to a fair trial (fabrication of evidence), and First Amendment retaliation based on his mother’s complaints to police.
Defendants moved for judgment on the pleadings under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(c); the district court granted the motion, dismissed the complaint, and denied leave to amend.
Lewis appealed the dismissal and the denial of leave to amend. The Second Circuit reviewed the 12(c) dismissal de novo and denial of amendment for legal error (futility).
The court treated the grand jury indictment as creating a presumption of probable cause that Lewis failed to rebut with particularized allegations of police fabrication or misconduct.
The court also held Lewis lacked third-party standing to assert a First Amendment retaliation claim based on his mother’s speech because she neither alleged injury nor any hindrance to asserting her own rights.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Malicious prosecution (state law and § 1983)	Lewis argued officers fabricated evidence leading to the indictment and his prosecution.	Indictment creates presumption of probable cause; Lewis’ allegations are conclusory and fail to plead fraud/perjury/suppression.	Affirmed dismissal: indictment presumed probable cause; Lewis did not plausibly allege conduct to rebut presumption.
Denial of right to a fair trial (fabrication of evidence)	Lewis alleged officers created false evidence that influenced prosecutors/jury.	Allegations lack specifics about what evidence was fabricated; therefore claim is conclusory.	Affirmed dismissal: complaint fails to plead particularized facts showing fabrication likely to influence jury.
First Amendment retaliation (based on mother’s speech)	Lewis claimed arrest/prosecution was retaliatory for his mother’s complaints to police.	Lewis lacks third-party standing to assert his mother’s First Amendment claim; she did not allege injury or a hindrance to asserting her rights.	Affirmed dismissal: no third-party standing because mother’s injury not alleged and no hindrance to her asserting rights.
Denial of leave to amend	Lewis argued amendment should be allowed and discovery was needed to plead specifics.	District court found proposed amendment futile given legal deficiencies and lack of particularized allegations.	Affirmed: denial not an abuse where allegations would remain insufficient to state claims.

Manganiello v. City of New York, 612 F.3d 149 (2d Cir. 2010) (elements of malicious prosecution and grand jury indictment presumption of probable cause)
Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007) (plausibility standard for pleading)
Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009) (conclusory allegations insufficient to survive pleading stage)
Ricciuti v. N.Y.C. Transit Auth., 124 F.3d 123 (2d Cir. 1997) (officer forwarding false information to prosecutors can violate right to a fair trial)
Camacho v. Brandon, 317 F.3d 153 (2d Cir. 2003) (third-party standing elements for asserting another’s constitutional claims)