14 F. Supp. 3d 631
E.D. Pa.2014Background
- On May 24, 2011, Steven Rosembert fled from police after a traffic stop while riding a motorcycle, ran into his home, and officers entered without a warrant and arrested him; he pleaded guilty to DUI and fleeing/eluding while 28 other charges were dismissed in a plea agreement.
- Rosembert alleges officers used excessive force (beatings, taser, "pistol-whip"), that the entry was an unlawful warrantless search, and that he was maliciously prosecuted because he is African-American.
- He sued five officers (individual and official capacities) and three boroughs under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and state law claims, including Monell failure-to-train/supervise claims, malicious prosecution, assault & battery, IIED, fraud, retaliation, and conspiracy (Counts I–X).
- Defendants moved to dismiss and to strike certain inflammatory allegations; the court treated pleadings under Twombly/Iqbal plausibility standard and considered public records from the criminal case on the motion.
- The court dismissed most claims (search/false arrest/malicious prosecution/fraud/retaliation/conspiracy/due process declaratory and injunctive relief and official-capacity intentional torts), but allowed excessive-force claims against officers and boroughs, Monell failure-to-train/supervise as to force, assault & battery (individual capacity) against two officers, and IIED against officers to proceed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Fourth Amendment claims (search, false arrest) survive despite guilty plea | Rosembert contends entry and arrest were unconstitutional and evidence should be excluded | Defendants say guilty plea bars these claims under Heck and establishes probable cause | Dismissed: search and false arrest barred by Heck and hot-pursuit and probable cause found; excessive-force claim survives |
| Municipal liability under Monell for excessive force and for failure to train/supervise | Boroughs had custom/policy of targeting African-Americans and supervisors participated or acquiesced | Boroughs argue inadequate Monell pleading | Denied (as to force and failure-to-train/supervise): pleadings sufficiently allege supervisory involvement and prior incidents to permit Monell theory |
| Malicious prosecution / fraud claims based on dismissed charges after plea | Plaintiff says dismissal of other counts is favorable termination | Defendants say dismissal was part of plea deal and not a favorable termination; Heck bars claims that would invalidate conviction | Dismissed: plea-agreement dismissals are not favorable terminations; claims would imply invalidity and are barred by Heck |
| State-law intentional torts, declaratory/injunctive relief, conspiracy, and other claims | Plaintiff asserts IIED, assault/battery, conspiracy, and seeks declaratory/injunctive relief | Defendants challenge adequacy, immunity under PA Tort Claims Act, lack of Article III standing, and failure to plead conspiracy particulars | Mixed: IIED and assault/battery survive as to officers in individual capacities; official-capacity intentional torts and borough IIED dismissed; injunctive/declaratory relief and conspiracy dismissed |
Key Cases Cited
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (pleading standard; plausibility required)
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (pleading standard; factual allegations must raise plausible claim)
- Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (§1983 claims barred when success would invalidate conviction)
- Monell v. Dep't of Soc. Servs., 436 U.S. 658 (municipal liability under §1983 requires policy/custom and causation)
- United States v. Santana, 427 U.S. 38 (hot-pursuit exception to warrant requirement)
- United States v. Watson, 423 U.S. 411 (warrantless public-arrest permissible with probable cause)
- Natale v. Camden Cnty. Corr. Facility, 318 F.3d 575 (Third Circuit discussion of Monell policy/custom categories)
- City of Los Angeles v. Lyons, 461 U.S. 95 (injunctive relief requires likelihood of future injury)