Nunez v. Vill. of Rockville Ctr.

1

LUIS A. NUNEZ, Plaintiff, v. VILLAGE OF ROCKVILLE CENTRE; VILLAGE OF ROCKVILLE CENTRE POLICE DEPARTMENT; NASSAU COUNTY; NASSAU COUNTY POLICE DEPARTMENT; POLICE OFFICER ANTHONY FEDERICO, Shield No. 2645, in his individual and official capacity; POLICE OFFICER JOHN SIRACO, JR., Shield No. 7945, in his individual and official capacity; POLICE OFFICER JOHN MURPHY, Shield No. 461, in his individual and official capacity; SERGEANT MICHAEL DOLAN, Shield No. 8483, in his individual and official capacity; DETECTIVE FRANK A. RUVOLO, Shield No. 7242, in his individual and official capacity, Defendants.

No. 2:18-cv-4249 (DRH) (SIL)

United States District Court, E.D. New York

February 22, 2022

LAW OFFICES OF FREDERICK K. BREWINGTON Attorneys for Plaintiff Frederick K. Brewington, Esq.

HAMMILL, O'BRIEN, CROUTIER, DEMPSEY, PENDER &amp KOEHLER, P.C. Attorneys for Defendants Village of Rockville Centre, Village of Rockville Centre Rebecca J. Moulton, Esq.

WILLIAM P. NOLAN, ESQ. Attorneys for Defendant Police Officer Anthony Federico, Shield No. 2645

THOMAS A. ADAMS, ACTING NASSAU COUNTY ATTORNEY Attorneys for Nassau County, Nassau County Police Department, Sergeant Michael Andrew R. Fuchs, Esq.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Denis R. Hurley United States District Judge

INTRODUCTION

Plaintiff Luis Nunez brings this civil rights action against Defendants Village of Rockville Centre (“Rockville Centre”) Village of Rockville Centre Police Department (“RCPD”), Nassau County, Nassau County Police Department (“NCPD”), Police Office Anthony Federico, Police Officer John Siraco, Jr., Police Officer John Murphy, Sergeant Michael Dolan, and Detective Frank A. Ruvolo under to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and New York state law. Presently before the Court are Defendants' motions for summary judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56.

Siraco, Murphy and Dolan's motions for summary judgment are denied as moot. Rockville Centre, RCPD, Nassau County, NCPD, and Ruvolo's motions are granted. Federico's motion is denied.

BACKGROUND

The following facts, taken from the parties' Local Rule 56.1 statements, ^[1] are undisputed unless otherwise noted. The Court limits its recitation to the actions of Defendants Rockville Centre, Nassau County, Federico, and Ruvolo as Plaintiff does not meaningfully contest the entry of summary judgment in favor of RCPD, NCPD, Siraco, Murphy, and Dolan. See infra Discussion Section I.

The Village of Rockville Centre is a municipal corporation located in New York State that has its own police department. (Nassau 56.1 ¶¶ 2-3). Nassau County, another New York municipal corporation, likewise has its own police department. (Id. ¶¶ 4-5). The Sunrise Highway is a roadway with a section that passes through Rockville Centre and Baldwin, a hamlet in Nassau County. The RCPD has jurisdiction over Rockville Centre; the NCPD has jurisdiction over Baldwin. (Pl. Opp. to RVC at 5 [DE 66-1]).

On the night of August 4, 2016, Plaintiff Luiz Nunez drove his motorcycle on the Sunrise Highway toward Baldwin, passing through an area of Rockville Centre patrolled by RCPD Officer Federico. (Federico 56.1 ¶¶ 1-4). Plaintiff and Defendants offer irreconcilable descriptions of the events that night.

As Plaintiff tells it, he was driving 40 miles-per-hour (“mph”), 10 mph over the 30-mph limit.^[2] (Pl. Resp. to RVC 56.1 ¶ 52). Between 11:00 PM and 11:30 PM, he stopped at a red light at the Sunrise Highway's intersection with Grand Avenue in Baldwin. (Id. ¶ 1). As Plaintiff waited, Federico drove his marked police SUV up to Plaintiff's motorcycle, turned on his police lights as he approached from the side, and stopped at an angle in front of Plaintiff, blocking the lane. (Pl. Resp. to RVC 56.1 ¶¶ 7, 56; Pl. Resp. to Federico 56.1 ¶¶ 12-18; Pl. Resp. to Nassau 56.1 ¶ 22). Federico immediately exited his vehicle and “pushed” or “threw [Plaintiff] and the motorcycle to the ground.” (Pl. Resp. to RVC 56.1 ¶¶ 8-9, 57, 59; Pl. Resp. to Nassau 56.1 ¶¶ 23- 24). Plaintiff's right hand, which had been resting on the throttle, then “jerked, ” causing the motorcycle to “jump ‘not even a foot.'” (Pl. Resp. to RVC 56.1 ¶¶ 8, 57; Pl. Resp. to Nassau 56.1 ¶¶ 23 (quoting Pl.'s Section 50-h Deposition Testimony at 89:24- 90:2 (“Pl. 50-h Tr.”), Ex. K [DEs 66-5, -17] to Declaration of Frederick K. Brewington (“Brewington Decl.”) [DE 66])). Plaintiff does not know whether the motorcycle “made contact with” Federico but “doesn't see how [it] could have caused harm” since it went left - away from Federico. (Pl. Resp. to RVC 56.1 ¶ 10, 58 (quoting Pl. 50-h Tr. at 97:9-17)). They fell to the ground. (Id. ¶ 9). Plaintiff “”immediately stood up” but when Federico pointed his gun at him, he promptly complied with Federico's orders to get back down on the ground. (Pl. Resp. to RVC 56.1 ¶¶ 12; Pl. Resp. to Federico 56.1 ¶ 17; RVC 56.1 Reply ¶ 16).

As Defendants tell it, Plaintiff was doing 80 mph, had a suspended driver's license-an ordinary license, not a motorcycle license-and had an active bench warrant out for his arrest. (Federico 56.1 ¶¶ 10-11; Def. Federico Deposition Testimony at 46:13-47:2 (“Federico Dep. Tr.”), Ex. N [DEs 66-9 to -11] to Brewington Decl.). Federico, in a marked police SUV, observed Plaintiff and followed him for one-to-two miles before instituting a stop after Plaintiff waited at the Sunrise Highway- Grand Avenue red light. (RVC 56.1 ¶¶ 53-55). Federico pulled his marked SUV in front of Plaintiff's motorcycle at an angle with its police lights on and exited his vehicle. (RVC 56.1 ¶ 7; Federico 56.1 ¶ 12; Nassau 56.1 ¶ 22). Plaintiff “hit the throttle” in an attempt to flee, “causing the motorcycle to jump approximately one (1) foot forward” and striking Federico in the left leg and shin. (RVC 56.1 ¶¶ 8, 58; Federico 56.1 ¶¶ 13-15; Nassau 56.1 ¶¶ 23-25; RVC 56.1 Reply ¶ 12). Federico pushed Plaintiff away from him and the two fell to the ground. (RVC 56.1 ¶ 59). Plaintiff immediately jumped back up, causing Federico to point his gun at Plaintiff and to direct Plaintiff to back to the ground. (RVC 56.1 ¶¶ 9, 11-12; Federico 56.1 Reply ¶ 16). Plaintiff ultimately complied. (RVC ¶ 12; Federico 56.1 ¶ 17).

A red-light camera records the intersection of Sunrise Highway and Grand Avenue. The parties have supplied the footage capturing the events in question. (See Ex. A [DE 66-3] to Brewington Decl.). They disagree on what it shows, (Pl. Resp. to RVC 56.1 ¶ 18), and the Court, having independently reviewed the footage, cannot say it unequivocally supports one side or the other. One party's testimony even aligns with the Court's view - that the poor video quality prevents any determination on what happened. (See RVC 56.1 ¶¶ 153, 155 (citing Dep. Testimony of Def. Frank Ruvolo, (“Ruvolo Tr.”), Ex. U [DE 65-24] to Brewington Decl.)).

The parties' recollections from that point forward generally harmonize. Federico handcuffed Plaintiff and requested backup. (RVC 56.1 ¶ 13). Several other police officers-both from Rockville Centre and Nassau County's Police Departments^[3]-arrived; Plaintiff admits they (not including Federico) were “very respectful” to him. (Id. ¶¶ 14-15, 60-62, 66). Federico requested an ambulance and was taken to the hospital - he had suffered “a contusion and abrasion to his shin.” (Id. ¶¶ 65, 67-68).

The officers took Plaintiff to the Nassau County First Precinct in Mineola, New York. (Id. ¶¶ 63 66; Federico 56.1 ¶¶ 20-21, 23-24). Federico later arrived at the First Precinct, too, in order to meet the Nassau County detective assigned to the matter: Defendant Detective Frank Ruvolo. (RVC 56.1 ¶¶ 69, Nassau 56.1 ¶ 52, 54- 56). Plaintiff and Federico did not speak to each other, but Plaintiff alleges he overhead Federico “bragg[ing] about how he had taken [Plaintiff] ‘down' like Federico was a hero or like [Plaintiff] was an animal.” (RVC ¶ 70; Pl. 56.1 Counter Statement to RVC and Federico ¶ 20). Federico swore out the criminal complaint against Plaintiff drafted by Ruvolo which charged Plaintiff with assault in the second degree, aggravated unlicensed operation of a motor vehicle in the second and third degrees, speeding, driving without a license, driving an unregistered vehicle, and driving without insurance. (RVC 56.1 ¶¶ 69-70, 146; Federico 56.1 ¶¶ 27-28; Nassau 56.1 ¶¶ 57, 59). Plaintiff was arraigned on August 5, 2016 and spent the next seven-to-eight days in the Nassau County jail. (Federico 56.1 ¶ 26; Decl. of Rebecca Moulton ¶ 29 [DE 65-1]).

In September 2016, roughly one month after the incident, Ruvolo obtained a copy of the red-light camera footage. (Pl. 56.1 Counter Statement to Nassau ¶ 4). Later, in passing, Ruvolo showed the footage to Federico. (Id. ¶ 5; Ruvolo Tr. at 88:9- 23). Their whole conversation at the time consisted of: “Hey, I got the video, you want to take a look?” (Ruvolo Tr. at 88:9-23). In December 2016, Ruvolo forwarded the footage to the prosecutors. (Pl. Counter Statement to Nassau ¶ 6). Even though Federico “instructed the [Nassau County] District Attorney's Office on multiple occasions that he wanted [Plaintiff] to be charged with a felony and to serve jail time, ” the District Attorney never presented the charges to a grand jury. (Pl. 56.1 Resp. to RVC ¶¶ 25-26). On August 14, 2017, Plaintiff's charges were dismissed on speedy trial grounds. (Federico 56.1 ¶ 30).

Plaintiff commenced this action on July 26, 2018. [DE 1]. The matter proceeded directly into discovery. By September 10, 2021, all Defendants had filed their motions for summary judgment. [DEs 65, 69, 73].

LEGAL STANDARD

Summary judgment, pursuant to Rule 56, is appropriate only where the movant “shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(a). The...