Swartz v. Insogna
2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 186
| 2d Cir. | 2013Background
- May 2006, John Swartz gave the finger to Officer Insogna during a traffic encounter in St. Johnsville, NY; Judy Mayton-Swartz driving, John passenger.
- Officers followed; Swartz and Judy were ordered back into the car; Don’t contest a traffic stop but are detained.
- John was arrested after saying, “I feel like an ass,” and charged with disorderly conduct; Judy’s license and registration were checked.
- Insogna filed a complaint resulting in a state criminal matter that remained pending for years and was eventually dismissed on speedy trial grounds.
- Plaintiffs sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging unlawful stop, false arrest for disorderly conduct, and malicious prosecution; district court granted summary judgment to defendants.
- The court on appeal vacated the judgment, vacating dismissal of all claims and remanding for further proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the stop violated the Fourth Amendment seizure standard | Swartz argues the stop was not supported by reasonable suspicion | Insogna relied on Swartz’s gesture as basis for stop | Stop not supported by reasonable suspicion; seizure inappropriate |
| Whether the arrest for disorderly conduct had probable cause | Swartz contends no conduct creating public disruption observed | Defendants assert conduct satisfied disorderly conduct statute | Probable cause lacking; arrest not justified on plaintiff's version |
| Whether defendants were entitled to qualified immunity for the stop/arrest | Qualified immunity does not apply to an unlawful stop/arrest | Officer acted with reasonable belief of lawfulness | No qualified immunity on the stop and arrest based on lack of probable cause/reasonable suspicion |
| Whether there was a post-arraignment seizure supporting malicious prosecution claims | Multiple court appearances tied to proceedings initiated by officer allegations | Precedent allowed post-arraignment seizures under some conditions | Issue to be resolved on remand; dismissal vacated; malicious prosecution claim revived for trial |
Key Cases Cited
- Sandul v. Larion, 119 F.3d 1250 (6th Cir. 1997) (seizure analysis and stopping authority in similar context)
- Jocks v. Tavernier, 316 F.3d 128 (2d Cir. 2003) (elements of malicious prosecution under §1983)
- Murphy v. Lynn, 118 F.3d 938 (2d Cir. 1997) (post-arraignment seizure implications in §1983 claims)
- Burg v. Gosselin, 591 F.3d 95 (2d Cir. 2010) (dictum on pre-arraignment summons not creating Fourth Amendment seizure)
- Rohman v. New York City Transit Authority, 215 F.3d 208 (2d Cir. 2000) (post-arraignment release conditions and seizure implications)