Yacubian v. United States
750 F.3d 100
1st Cir.2014Background
- Yacubian, a former scallop fisherman, was prosecuted by NOAA in 2000 for two prohibited-fishing counts and a false-statement count.
- BOATRACS data and an ALJ hearing supported the charges; one witness (Lt. Hanlon) testified but faced pressure not to testify.
- NOAA upheld the NOVA/NOPS on appeal and later levied substantial penalties and permit sanctions.
- A 2004 district-court remand directed NOAA to reconsider penalties; a 2005 settlement followed.
- OIG reports (2010) criticized NOAA’s enforcement practices and led to a Special Master’s findings; Secretary Locke later directed a partial reimbursement to Yacubian.
- In 2012 Yacubian filed FTCA claims alleging abuse of process and malicious prosecution; the district court dismissed as time-barred and under the intentional-torts exception.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether FTCA allows malicious-prosecution/abuse-of-process claims against prosecutors. | Yacubian argues SAC Cohen’s actions caused wrongful prosecution. | Prosecutors are immune under §2680(h); only investigators/officers fit the exception. | Affirmed: prosecutors immune; no plausible involvement by Cohen. |
| Whether SAC Cohen plausibly caused the false-statement prosecution. | Cohen induced pressure that enabled the false-statement charges. | Allegations show Cohen’s post-charge actions only; not initiation or control of the charges. | Affirmed: no plausible inference that Cohen initiated or caused the false-statement prosecution. |
| Whether Yacubian states a plausible abuse-of-process claim under Massachusetts law. | Cohen used process for ulterior purpose to harm Yacubian. | No showing Cohen used process to pursue improper objective in initiating the NOVA/NOPS. | Affirmed: no improper use of process shown in the record. |
Key Cases Cited
- Limone v. United States, 579 F.3d 79 (1st Cir. 2009) (FTCA excludes prosecutors from the intentional-tort exception)
- Ocasio-Hernández v. Fortuño-Burset, 640 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2011) (standard for reviewing Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal; pleadings construed in plaintiff’s favor)
- Lobsters, Inc. v. Evans, 346 F. Supp. 2d 340 (D. Mass. 2004) (vacated penalties and remanded for de novo reconsideration)
- Bernard v. United States, 25 F.3d 98 (2d Cir. 1994) (prosecutors’ actions generally outside FTCA scope)
- Iqbal v. United States, 556 U.S. 662 (U.S. 2009) (pleading standard requires plausible claims; not mere speculation)
- González-Rucci v. U.S. I.N.S., 539 F.3d 66 (1st Cir. 2008) (FTCA scope and choice of governing law for torts)
- Chervin v. Travelers Ins. Co., 858 N.E.2d 746 (Mass. 2006) (elements of Massachusetts malicious prosecution)
- Gutierrez v. Mass. Bay Transp. Auth., 772 N.E.2d 552 (Mass. 2002) (use of papers to issue process; abuse of process basics)