191 F. Supp. 3d 198
N.D.N.Y.2016Background
- Plaintiff Steven Rubeor, formerly the Town of Wright assessor, filed an Article 78 in state court and a § 1983 claim in federal court after the Town Board (and individual members) ended the Town’s participation in a County Assessment Program (CAP) and he was replaced.
- Defendants removed the case to federal court and moved for judgment on the pleadings under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(c), asserting legislative immunity, qualified immunity, failure to state a claim against Susan Crosby, and redundancy of official-capacity claims.
- The federal court abstained and remanded the Article 78 claims; the New York Supreme Court and Appellate Division ruled for Rubeor, holding his six-year term as Town assessor continued despite the Town’s withdrawal from the CAP.
- After the state-court rulings, the federal court lifted a stay and considered the 12(c) motion on the pleadings without converting to summary judgment.
- The district court held (1) individual town-board members are not entitled to legislative immunity for the removal because the state court established Rubeor had a property right in the assessor office; (2) individual defendants are entitled to qualified immunity because the right was not clearly established at the time of removal; (3) claims against Susan Crosby are dismissed as moot / no longer necessary; and (4) official-capacity claims against individuals are redundant and dismissed. Claims against the Town of Wright and the Town Board remain.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Town Board members are entitled to legislative immunity for withdrawing from the CAP and ending Rubeor’s assessor service | Rubeor: withdrawal effectively terminated his term only if inconsistent with Public Officers Law § 36; removing him violated law and was not legislative | Town: withdrawing from CAP was a legislative act; Rubeor was a CAP employee, not a Town officer, so § 36 did not apply | Not entitled: Appellate Division held withdrawal did not truncate the six-year term, so removal was administrative and not shielded by legislative immunity |
| Whether individual defendants are entitled to qualified immunity for removing Rubeor | Rubeor: removal deprived him of a property interest without due process | Town: reasonable belief withdrawal ended Rubeor’s term; law was unclear | Entitled: right was not "clearly established" at time of removal because state law on CAP effect was unresolved, so officials get qualified immunity |
| Whether Susan Crosby should remain a defendant | Rubeor included Crosby as a necessary party because she replaced him | Crosby: not a proper target; reinstatement remedy is now moot | Dismissed: Crosby is no longer a necessary party; Rubeor does not oppose dismissal to extent his reinstatement remedy is moot |
| Whether official-capacity claims against individual defendants are redundant | Rubeor preserved official-capacity claims against individuals and municipality | Defendants: official-capacity claims duplicate claims against Town and Town Board | Dismissed: official-capacity claims against individuals are redundant and dismissed |
Key Cases Cited
- Bogan v. Scott-Harris, 523 U.S. 44 (legislative immunity protects legislative acts)
- Reichle v. Howards, 566 U.S. 658 (qualified-immunity standard; immunity from suit)
- Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223 (resolving qualified-immunity questions early; flexible two-step test)
- Cleveland Bd. of Educ. v. Loudermill, 470 U.S. 532 (state law defines property interest; removal-for-cause entitles due process)
- Rubeor v. Town of Wright, 134 A.D.3d 1211 (N.Y. App. Div.) (state court: withdrawal from CAP did not truncate assessor’s six-year term; plaintiff had property right)