Acquah v. City of Syracuse

LIZA ACQUAH, GUARDIAN AD LITEM FOR J.B., A MINOR, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF SYRACUSE, et al., Defendants.

5:18-CV-1378 (LEK/DEP)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

August 22, 2019

MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER

I. INTRODUCTION

In February 2017, Defendant Police Officer Vallon Smith arrived at Nottingham High School in Syracuse, New York in response to a call from Vice Principal Kenneth Baxter, who requested that Officer Smith remove Plaintiff J.B. from the school for trespassing. Dkt. No. 1 ("Complaint") ¶¶ 15-16. A struggle ensued between Plaintiff and Officer Smith as Smith attempted to arrest Plaintiff. Id. ¶¶ 19-23. Defendant Police Officer Sheldon Lloyd arrived during the struggle and assisted Officer Smith in arresting Plaintiff. Id. ¶ 26. As a result of the struggle, Plaintiff suffered a concussion and a broken arm. Id. ¶ 47.

Plaintiff's Complaint for damages contains both federal and state claims against the City of Syracuse, the Syracuse Police Department, Chief of Police Frank Fowler, and Officers Smith and Lloyd. Compl. at 1. Under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, Plaintiff alleges the use of excessive force, false arrest, false imprisonment, and assault and battery against Officers Smith and Lloyd, and a Monell claim against the City of Syracuse and Chief Fowler. Compl. at 1; see Monell v. Dep't of Soc. Servs. of City of N.Y., 436 U.S. 658, 694-95 (1978) (holding that municipalities may be liable under § 1983 only when an official policy or custom causes the constitutional violation). Plaintiff alleges the state claims of false imprisonment, assault, and battery against Officers Smith and Lloyd; and negligent training, hiring, retention, and supervision, as well as respondeat superior liability against the City of Syracuse. Compl. at 1; see Monell, 436 U.S. at 658.

Now before the Court is Defendants' motion to dismiss. Dkt. No. 6 ("Motion to Dismiss"). Defendants move to dismiss the state claims as untimely, the § 1983 assault and battery claims as redundant of the excessive force claim, the § 1983 false imprisonment and false arrest claims on the grounds that the arrest was privileged, and the Monell claims for failure to state a claim. Dkt. No. 6-4 ("Defendants' Memorandum") at 3-13. Defendants also move to bifurcate the Monell claims from the claims against the police officers. Defs.' Mem. at 17-20. Finally, Defendants request that this Court either direct Plaintiff to replead certain parts of the Complaint or strike portions of the Complaint under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(e) and (f) because the Complaint allegedly contains impertinent, immaterial, and scandalous matter. Id. at 20-26. For the following reasons, the state claims, the § 1983 assault and battery claims, and the § 1983 false imprisonment and false arrest claims are dismissed. The motion to dismiss the Monell claims is denied. As Defendants did not move to dismiss the excessive force claims, it also survives. Additionally, the motion to bifurcate the Monell claims and the request to order Plaintiff to replead or strike parts of the Complaint are denied.

II. BACKGROUND

The Court draws all facts, which are assumed to be true, from the Complaint and any documents attached to the Complaint. See Amidax Trading Grp. v. S.W.I.F.T. SCRL, 671 F.3d 140, 145 (2d Cir. 2011). Plaintiff J.B. is a 14-year-old freshman at Nottingham High School who has special needs. Compl. ¶ 52. The high school is located in Syracuse, New York. Id. On Thursday, February 9, 2017, Officer Smith of the Syracuse Police Department responded to a call from Vice Principal Baxter to come remove Plaintiff from the school. Id. ¶ 15. Vice Principal Baxter had already suspended Plaintiff from the school and ordered him to leave the premises. Id. When Officer Smith arrived, Plaintiff had reentered the school to keep warm while waiting for a bus to pick him up because it was 15 degrees outside with 17 MPH winds, creating a negative wind-chill factor. Id. Vice Principal Baxter told Officer Smith that "he instructed [Plaintiff] to leave the school and [Plaintiff] had refused to leave." Id. ¶ 16. Baxter told Smith that "he want[ed] [Plaintiff] arrested for trespassing." Id. Regarding the events that follow this point in time, there is a dispute between Officer Smith's police report and the facts stated in the Complaint, which are supported by video evidence. Id. ¶¶ 28-47. The facts stated in the Complaint are as follows.

Officer Smith approached Plaintiff and began to escort him out of the building. Id. ¶ 17. As the pair proceeded toward the entrance of the building, Officer Smith suddenly lunged at Plaintiff, who had his hands in his pockets at this time. Id. ¶¶ 18-19. Officer Smith slammed Plaintiff against the wall, squeezing the back of his neck. Id. ¶¶ 19-20. Plaintiff then removed his hands from his pockets to attempt to free himself from Smith's grip. Id. ¶¶ 20-22. Officer Smith reacted by slamming Plaintiff against the wall again, punching Plaintiff in the head and face, and attempting to wrestle him to the floor. Id. ¶ 23. Four large, male members of the school staff eventually approached the scene to try to pull Officer Smith away from Plaintiff, but they ultimately failed. Id. ¶ 24. Officer Lloyd arrived at the scene as back-up just after the four staff members attempted to intervene. Id. ¶ 26. Together, Smith and Lloyd lifted Plaintiff into the air and slammed his body to the ground, breaking his left arm and causing him to suffer a concussion. Id. At this point, the Officers arrested Plaintiff. Id.

Liza Acquah, Guardian Ad Litem for Plaintiff, filed a notice of claim against the City of Syracuse on April 10, 2017. Dkt. No. 6-2 ("First Notice of Claim"). The notice of claim alleged that her son, Plaintiff, had been arrested at school and came home with an injured arm. Id. The video footage of the incident at the school was not released until March 29, 2018. Compl. ¶ 8. Plaintiff's Guardian Ad Litem filed a second notice of claim five days after the video was released, on April 3, 2018. Id. She filed the Complaint on November 28, 2018. Dkt. No. 1.

III. LEGAL STANDARD

To survive a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a "complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to 'state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.'" Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quoting Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). The complaint need not contain "detailed factual allegations," but must contain more than legal conclusions "devoid of 'further factual enhancement.'" Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678 (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 557). A claim is facially plausible when the plaintiff has pleaded facts that allow the court to reasonably infer that the defendant is liable. Id. The plausibility standard demands "more than a sheer possibility that defendant has acted unlawfully." Id. However, if those facts raise "the reasonable expectation that discovery will reveal evidence of the [misconduct]," the complaint states a claim. Twombly, 550 U.S. at 556. The Court must take the facts as true and draw all reasonable inferences in Plaintiff's favor. Amidax Trading Grp., 671 F.3d at 145.

I. DISCUSSION

A. Syracuse Police Department

Since a police department "may not sue or be sued" under New York law, the Syracuse Police Department must be dismissed from this case. Jenkins v. Liadka, No. 10-CV-1223, 2012 WL 4052286, at *9 (N.D.N.Y. Sept. 13, 2012). Police departments are "merely administrative arms" of a municipality, so they do not have their own legal identities under which they can sue or be sued. Id. The City of Syracuse is the municipality in this case, so the Monell claims should be directed toward the City of Syracuse, not the Syracuse Police Department. Id. Therefore, the Syracuse Police Department is dismissed from this case.

B. Plaintiff's State Law Claims

In federal court, "state notice-of-claim statutes apply to state-law claims." Hardy v. N.Y.C. Health & Hosp. Corp., 163 F.3d 789, 793 (2d Cir. 1999). In New York, a notice-of-claim against a municipality or any officer appointed by a municipality must be filed within ninety days after the claim accrues. N.Y. Gen. Mun. Law § 50-e(1)(a). The notice must contain the name and address of the claimant, the nature of the claim, the time and place where the claim arose, and the injuries claimed to have been sustained. N.Y. Gen. Mun. Law § 50-e(2).

Plaintiff's Guardian Ad Litem filed a notice-of-claim on April 10, 2017, which is within ninety days after the claim accrued on February 9, 2017. First Notice of Claim. However, this notice did not contain a sufficient description of the nature of the claim as required by the state law. Id. § 50-e(2). It merely stated that Plaintiff had been arrested at school and he came home with a broken arm without alleging any wrongdoing. First Notice of Claim.

After the video footage of the incident was released on March 29, 2018, Plaintiff's Guardian Ad Litem filed a second notice-of-claim on April 3, 2018. Compl. ¶ 8. However, April 3, 2018 is well beyond ninety days after the incident, which occurred on February 9, 2017. Id. ¶ 15. A plaintiff must seek leave of the state supreme court or county court to file a late notice-of-claim, or else the claim is null. N.Y. Gen. Mun. Law § 50-e(7); Tyk v. Surat, 675 Fed. App'x 40, 42 (2d Cir. 2017). However, Plaintiff failed to seek permission to file his notice-of-claim late. Dkt. No. 16 ("Plaintiff's Opposition") at 11. Therefore, Plaintiff's state law claims are dismissed. N.Y. Gen. Mun. Law § 50-e(7); Tyk, 675 Fed. App'x at 42.

Plaintiff argues that his delay may be excused under Rule 6(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which says that the Court may extend the time for motion papers "after the time has expired if the party failed to act because of excusable neglect." Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1)(B); Pl.'s Opp'n at 11. However Rule 6(b) permits co...