Moses v. Mele
711 F.3d 213
1st Cir.2013Background
- Plaintiff Crystal Moses seeks damages for false arrest and malicious prosecution against Mark Mele.
- At the time of relevant events, Moses, her son Kyle, and Kyle’s girlfriend Catherine Sims lived together.
- Kyle’s car crashed in Lebanon, NH; Mele helped respond and Kyle was arrested for reckless conduct, simple assault, and criminal threatening.
- Sims gave a written statement about the crash and later met with Mele at police headquarters after being contacted by him.
- Mele interviewed Sims alone, warned she could be arrested if she left, and escorted Sims and Moses out of the station when Moses accompanied Sims.
- A July 2008 warrant and subsequent indictment for witness tampering followed; the case was eventually dismissed; Moses later sued in federal court in 2010 asserting federal and state-law claims, and the district court granted summary judgment on immunity grounds.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether qualified immunity bars the Fourth Amendment false-arrest claim. | Moses argues no arguable probable cause. | Mele contends probable cause was at least arguable. | Yes; qualified immunity applies. |
| Whether official immunity forecloses the state-law malicious-prosecution claim. | Moses challenges district court’s official-immunity ruling. | Mele argues official immunity should preclude the claim. | Abandoned on appeal; no ruling on merits. |
| Whether the prior state proceedings preclude a finding of lack of probable cause. | Preclusion should bar reconsideration of probable cause. | Preclusion arguments were not reached. | Not reached; court relies on immunity determinations. |
| Whether the district court correctly granted summary judgment given undisputed facts. | Disputed facts show no qualified immunity. | Record shows probable cause at least arguable. | Judgment affirmed on immunity grounds. |
| Whether the appeal should reconsider the merits or defer to the district court’s reasoning. | Argues for different reasoning. | Agree with district court’s approach. | Affirmed consistent with district court. |
Key Cases Cited
- Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 (U.S. 1982) (qualified immunity from monetary damages for police conduct; reasonable official belief standard)
- Ricci v. Urso, 974 F.2d 5 (1st Cir. 1992) (probable cause need not be proven; aspect of qualified immunity on false-arrest claim)
- Martinez v. Colon, 54 F.3d 980 (1st Cir. 1995) (standard for applying qualified immunity when material facts are disputed)
- Brennan v. Hendrigan, 888 F.2d 189 (1st Cir. 1989) (qualified-immunity standards and summary judgment)
- Cox v. Hainey, 391 F.3d 25 (1st Cir. 2004) (analysis of qualified-immunity questions in the First Circuit)
- Morelli v. Webster, 552 F.3d 12 (1st Cir. 2009) (decision on when summary judgment is appropriate in qualified-immunity cases)
- Buenrostro v. Collazo, 973 F.2d 39 (1st Cir. 1992) (when disputes cannot be resolved on summary judgment, immunity remains a question of law)