McCloud v. Cossuto, Esq.
1:24-cv-03372
E.D.N.YJun 24, 2024Background
- Michael McCloud, proceeding pro se, filed a civil rights lawsuit alleging violations of the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments and conspiracy, among other claims, stemming from his criminal prosecution in Kings County Criminal Court (Docket No. CR-004096-23KN).
- McCloud claims he was arrested without probable cause, subjected to nonconsensual medical procedures by defendants Lorenzi (a police officer) and Hashmi (a physician), and that the experience caused him significant harm, including serious illness.
- He further alleges ineffective assistance of counsel by attorney Cossuto, including threats, ignoring legal requests, and inappropriate conduct.
- Plaintiff asserts a cover-up by Cossuto, Lorenzi, Hashmi, and Assistant District Attorney Chachura regarding the medical procedures and alleged judicial improprieties.
- McCloud also alleges the presiding judges (Ward and Fong-Frederick) violated his rights due to his hearing disability.
- The court dismissed claims against judges Ward and Fong-Frederick on grounds of judicial immunity but allowed the case to proceed against Lorenzi, Cossuto, Hashmi, and Chachura.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Judicial immunity for actions of judges | Judges violated rights while presiding over his case and sentencing | Judges acted in judicial capacity, immune | Judges immune; claims dismissed |
| Violation of civil rights (arrest/medical) | Arrest lacked probable cause, forced medical procedures violated rights | Not addressed in this order | Case can proceed on these claims |
| Ineffective assistance of counsel | Cossuto provided substandard legal representation with threats, neglect | Not addressed in this order | Case can proceed on these claims |
| Cover-up and conspiracy claims | Defendants conspired to conceal unlawful conduct and conflicts | Not addressed in this order | Case can proceed on these claims |
Key Cases Cited
- Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (pleading standard for plausibility on a motion to dismiss)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (distinction between factual allegations and legal conclusions on a motion to dismiss)
- Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89 (liberal construction of pro se pleadings)
- Mireles v. Waco, 502 U.S. 9 (judicial immunity applies to acts within judicial capacity)
- Montero v. Travis, 171 F.3d 757 (frivolous complaints can be dismissed when defendants are immune from suit)