Pal v. Cipolla

NEELU PAL, Plaintiff, v. ROBERT CIPOLLA, et al., Defendants.

No. 3:18cv616 (MPS)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT

November 23, 2020

RULING ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Neelu Pal brings this action against the Town of Wilton, Wilton police officers Robert Cipolla, Robert Smaldone, Michael Tyler, and Scott Sear; and Wilton Ambulance employees Daniel Monahan and Richard Janes.¹ ECF No. 49. She alleges deprivation of civil rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (count one); excessive force under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (count two); unlawful search under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (count three); malicious prosecution under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (count four); malicious abuse of process under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (count five); conspiracy to violate civil rights (count seven); assault and battery (count eight); negligent infliction of emotional distress (count nine); intentional infliction of emotional distress (count ten); theft and larceny (count eleven); and negligence (count twelve).² Id. The Town of Wilton and police officers Cipolla, Smaldone, Tyler, and Sear (collectively "Defendants") move for summary judgment as to all counts. ECF No. 152. For the reasons discussed below, the motion is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. I address in a separate ruling issued today the motion for summary judgment filed by the defendant Wilton Ambulance employees. ECF No. 147.

I. FACTS

The following facts, which are taken from the parties' Local Rule 56(a) statements and supporting exhibits, are undisputed unless otherwise indicated.³

Pal was a resident of Wilton. ECF No. 177-2 at 44. Her four year old son attended preschool at the Goddard School in Wilton. ECF No. 177-2 at 22-23, 28. Pal told Debbie Lee, the school's owner, that she was concerned that people, including Lee's husband, were observing children while they were in the bathroom and taking photographs. ECF No. 177-2 at 31.

Asma Ahmad was a teacher at the school. ECF No. 177-2 at 8, 25. Pal saw Ahmad almost every day when Pal would drop off and pick up her son. Id. On April 28, 2015, Pal emailed Lee that Ahmad was upset at Lee and was repeatedly texting and emailing Pal about it. ECF No. 177-2 at 30, 35-36.

At 11:28 a.m. on April 29, 2015, Lee called the Wilton Police Department regarding Ahmad. ECF No. 153-5 at 6. Lee explained that Ahmad was no longer employed at the school but was contacting parents. Id. She said that a parent (referring to Pal) had contacted her and had said that Ahmad had told Pal to meet Ahmad at the school to "witness" something. ECF No. 153-5 at 7-8. Lee further stated that Pal thought Ahmad "might even be outside her house." ECF No. 153-5 at 6. Dispatcher Galpin instructed Lee to tell parents not to have any contact with Ahmad and not to meet her. ECF No. 153-5 at 10. The dispatcher placed Lee on hold. ECF No. 153-5 at 15.

Pal Calls the Wilton Police Department

While Lee was on the phone with Galpin, Pal called the main line of the Wilton police department. ECF No. 153-5 at 16, 19. She spoke to Officer Sisenstein and stated that "one of the preschool teachers has somehow quit or made some kind of threat against my child, I'm not quite sure what's going on." ECF No. 153-5 at 19. Pal stated that the teacher, Asma, lived in Stamford. ECF No. 153-5 at 22. Pal further stated "[a]nd this woman is telling me she wants to meet me in the parking lot of the Goddard School and she wants me to witness something. And I'm -- I'm like sending this woman -- the person who is -- who is in charge of this Goddard School and this woman is not getting it. Like it's a little scary, you know . . . ." ECF No. 153-5 at 22-23. Sisenstein told Pal to hold on and placed the call on hold. ECF No. 153-5 at 24. The call then terminated.

At 11:36 a.m., Pal called 911. ECF No. 153-5 at 26. She told Dispatcher Galpin that she could not believe that she had been placed on hold and that she needed someone to come to her home. ECF No. 153-5 at 26. Galpin explained that Pal had been speaking to Officer Sisenstein, who had put the call on hold so he could discuss it with Galpin. Id. Pal responded that it was "rude" of Officer Sistenstein to put her on hold and that Galpin "need[ed] to understand this woman has been driving back and forth . . . in front of my property." Id. Galpin asked Pal to call back on the regular line and speak to Officer Sisenstein because 911 was only for emergencies. Id. Pal replied "no, I am not going to do that." Id. She asked "Who are the people who are involved in this? This woman is driving back in front [sic] and forth . . . in front of my property." ECF 153-5 at 27. Galpin repeated that the 911 line was for emergencies and to "call back on a routine line. Please." ECF No. 153-5 at 27-28. When Pal declared "No, I will not," Galpin stated "You have to. I have to hang up, ma'am. I'm disconnecting the call." ECF No. 153-5 at 28.

Two minutes later, at 11:38 a.m., Pal called 911 again. ECF No. 153-5 at 30. She stated that she had "just spoke[n] to Officer Galpin who does not wish to speak with me." Id. Dispatcher Galpin gave her the telephone number of the main line of the police department and told her to call that number. Id. at 30-31. Pal responded that she had '"already called and they put me on this line." Id. at 31. Galpin explained he had not "put [her] on this line." Id.

When Galpin resumed the call with Lee, who had been on hold, Lee heard that Pal had called in on another line. ECF No. 153-5 at 15. Lee asked whether Pal was filing a report and Galpin responded that Pal was "harassing us. She's calling - the officer was speaking with her on another line, so he put her on hold and she starts calling us on 911 . . . I said, ma'am I have to disconnect this call for emergencies. And now she just called back." Id. at 16. He concluded the conversation by telling Lee that an officer would go to the school to speak to her. Id. at 17.

At 11:39 a.m., Pal called the main line and spoke to Sisenstein. Id. at 33. He explained he had placed her on hold to discuss the case with Galpin who was on the phone "with somebody else about the exact same case." Id. at 36. Pal told him that Ahmad had asked her to meet Ahmad at the school. Id. at 36-37. Pal further stated that Lee was not properly responding to the situation. Id. at 38 ("Debbie said she would contact me. I'm not going to send my kid to school until . . . . Debbie is in the clear about this thing. . . And she's not.") Pal went on to say that "I'm so scared and afraid about this woman because I - I may be wrong, but here's what I think, is someone who looks like Asma is, like, driving back and forth in front of my property and I'm not okay with that."Id. at 39. Sisenstein told Pal that an officer was on his way to the school to speak to Lee. Id. at 41. Pal responded "Okay" and the call ended. Id. at 42.

In an 11:43 a.m. call, Galpin informed Cipolla that Lee had reported an issue with a former employee contacting parents. Id. at 44. Galpin further stated that the former employee had told a parent to meet her at the school to see something. ECF No. 153-5 at 44. Galpin said that while he was on the phone with Lee, a woman (Pal) had called in and spoke to Sistenstein, that Sistenstein put the call on hold to speak to Galpin about it, and instead of holding, the woman called 911. Id. at 46. Galpin explained that when he answered the 911 call, he told the caller that he was speaking to Sisenstein about the issue and that she should hang up but that she refused and instead called 911 again. Id. Galpin remarked to Cipolla, "I'm like, oh-ho, man, someone is looking to get pinched over here." Id. at 47.

Officer Smaldone Investigates

Officers Smaldone and Cipolla went to the Goddard School to investigate Lee's report. ECF No. 153-1. Lee told them she had been in contact with a parent, Pal, who was concerned because Ahmad had called her several times about a dispute Ahmad was having with Lee and Ahmad had requested that Pal meet her at the school to "witness something." ECF No. 152-2 at ¶¶ 4-5; ECF No. 175-1 at ¶¶ 4-5. After meeting with Lee, Smaldone proceeded to Pal's residence to continue his investigation and look into Pal's report that a vehicle, which may have been Ahmad's, had repeatedly driven by Pal's residence. ECF No. 152-2 at ¶ 10; ECF No. 175-1 at ¶ 10.

According to Smaldone's report, he checked the area and could not substantiate Pal's claim that a vehicle was repeatedly driving by her home. ECF No. 153 at 3. He reviewed the messages between Pal and Ahmad, which he described as "good-natured," and although there were messagesregarding a conflict between Ahmad and Lee, there was nothing "that could be considered harassment or threatening." ECF No. 153 at 3. He assured Pal that he would speak to Ahmad and advise her not to contact Pal anymore. ECF No. 153 at 4.

Pal has a different version. She testified that she "started telling [Smaldone] about what was going on" but he was "dismissive" of her concerns and did not look at the text messages. ECF No. 177-2 at 50 ("he was so dismissive. He wouldn't even listen. He wouldn't look at the phone. He wouldn't hear anything out. As soon as I mentioned Debbie Lee's name, he became really defensive. His tone of·voice and his attitude changed completely . . . ."); ECF No. 177-2 at 60; 177-1 at ¶ 42. According to Pal, Smaldone left without telling her what was going to happen next. ECF No. 177-2 at 50-51. Pal maintains that after Smaldone left her residence, she continued to see a vehicle driving past her house. ECF No. 177-2 at 91; 177-1 at ¶¶ 46-48.

At 1:16 p.m., Pal called 911 asking for the name of the officer who had come to her home. ECF No. 153-5 at 51. She asked Galpin, who answered the call, to spell the officer's name for her and thanked him. Id.

At 1:22 p.m., Smaldone called Ahmad. ECF No. 152-2 at ¶ 15; ECF No. 175-1 at ¶ 15; ECF No. 153-5 at 53. Ahmad explained that she had quit working for the Goddard School because of her "health issues" and because Lee had treated...