Schlaepfer v. City of New York

1

DANIEL SCHLAEPFER, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF NEW YORK; NEW YORK POLICE DEPARTMENT; MATHEW JOHN, in his official capacity as a Police Officer with the New York Police Department; JOHN DOES 1-10, fictitious names, sued in their official capacity as law enforcement officers with the New York Police Department; MAXIMILLIAN ZAPATA; PATRICK CHERRY; and MAVIS GARCIA, Defendants.

No. 20 Civ. 3339 (KPF)

United States District Court, S.D. New York

September 27, 2022

OPINION AND ORDER

KATHERINE POLK FAILLA UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.

Plaintiff Daniel Schlaepfer seeks damages from a late-night encounter with law enforcement officers outside of a Manhattan nightclub. Now before the Court is a motion for summary judgment filed by Defendants City of New York (the “City”); Police Officers Mathew John, Maximillian Zapata, and Mavis Garcia of the New York City Police Department (the “NYPD”); and NYPD Sergeant Patrick Cherry (together with John and Zapata, the “Officers,” and all together with the City “Defendants”). For the reasons that follow, the Court grants Defendants' motion for summary judgment with respect to Plaintiff's federal and state civil rights claims, and declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over his remaining state law claims.

BACKGROUND^[1]

A. Factual Background

The following facts are undisputed, unless specified otherwise. On June 2, 2019, Plaintiff and his wife, non-party Vanessa Rosario, visited New York City from their home in Toronto. (Def. 56.1 Reply ¶¶ 5, 7). That evening, the couple met friends for a glass of champagne at the rooftop lounge of the Peninsula Hotel, then accompanied their friends to dinner, where they each had approximately two glasses of wine. (Id. at ¶¶ 8-9). After leaving dinner, Plaintiff, his wife, and their two friends visited LAVO Italian Restaurant and Nightclub (“LAVO”), located at 40 East 58th Street, New York, New York. (Id. at ¶ 10). The nightclub located on the ground floor of the building was not yet open when the group arrived, so they waited in the restaurant on the second floor. (Id.). As they waited, Plaintiff consumed three additional alcoholic beverages. (Id.).

At some point between 11:00 p.m. and 11:30 p.m., the nightclub on the ground floor opened and Plaintiff's group proceeded downstairs, where they were seated at a private table that Plaintiff had reserved. (Def. 56.1 Reply ¶ 11). Plaintiff recalls that he ordered three bottles of champagne and two bottles of vodka for the table, and that he consumed multiple glasses of champagne from the time of his arrival at the nightclub, between 11:00 p.m. and 11:30 p.m., to the time of his departure, at approximately 3:45 a.m. (Id. at ¶¶ 12-13, 24).^[2]

At approximately 3:00 a.m., two women unknown to Plaintiff's group approached Plaintiff's table and helped themselves to champagne without the consent of Plaintiff or his companions. (Def. 56.1 Reply ¶ 15). Thereafter, according to Plaintiff and his wife, one of the women attempted to steal Ms. Rosario's handbag from a bench, but one of Plaintiff's friends stopped her from doing so. (Id.). Plaintiff alerted LAVO security guards, who evicted the two women from the nightclub. (Id. at ¶ 16). At the time the women were evicted from LAVO, approximately ten NYPD officers were situated outside of the nightclub to assist with crowd control resulting from celebrity appearances from Cardi B. and the Migos Twins at LAVO that night. (Id. at ¶ 17). Once outside, one of the women (identified as “Alexa I.”^[3]) approached some of the nearby officers, including Officer John and Sergeant Cherry, to complain that she had been assaulted inside the nightclub. (Id. at ¶¶ 19-20; Morogiello BWC, at 3:30 a.m. to 3:45 a.m.).

In particular, Alexa alleged that a female inside the club, later identified as Plaintiff's wife, physically assaulted her by pushing and throwing her down. (Def. 56.1 Reply ¶ 20). Alexa further claimed that despite being the victim of this incident, LAVO security guards had evicted her and her friend. (Id. at ¶ 21). Alexa wanted the officers to arrest Ms. Rosario and demanded that they enter LAVO to review surveillance video in order to corroborate her complaint. (Id.). Neither Officer John nor Sergeant Cherry noticed any sign of injury consistent with Alexa's complaint. (Pl. 56.1 Reply ¶ 19; John Dep. 55:1-14; Cherry Dep. 33:1-7). The Officers took no action on Alexa's complaint other than to take a report. (Def. 56.1 Reply ¶ 22). After lodging her complaint, Alexa and her friend remained standing outside LAVO adjacent to the entrance. (Id. at ¶ 23).

At approximately 3:45 a.m., Plaintiff and Ms. Rosario exited LAVO and proceeded to walk east on 58th Street. (Def. 56.1 Reply ¶ 24 (describing the couple as “intoxicated”); Pl. Dep. 92:10-93:18 (Plaintiff describing himself as steady on his feet but not “perfectly sober,” and describing his wife as steady on her feet but “appear[ing] intoxicated”)). As the pair walked past Alexa and her companion, the two women pointed to Ms. Rosario and shouted to the NYPD officers present, “It's her, it's her ... this is the girl ... arrest this girl!” (Def. 56.1 Reply ¶ 26 (quoting Morogiello BWC at 3:46:10-15)). Alexa approached Ms. Rosario while pointing at her face, and Ms. Rosario swatted Alexa's hand away before turning to face the two women. (Id. at ¶¶ 27-28; Morogiello BWC at 3:46:18-3:46:35). The three women began shouting at each other, drawing the attention of others outside LAVO. (Id.). Officer John then stepped between the women to prevent the argument from escalating further, while Officer Morogiello grabbed Ms. Rosario's right arm. (Def. 56.1 Reply ¶¶ 29-30; Morogiello BWC at 3:45:35-37).

At this stage, Plaintiff's and Defendants' characterizations of the facts diverge. The Court presents each side's version of the story to the extent it comports with the available video footage and other evidence.^[4] According to Defendants, Ms. Rosario resisted Officer John and began yelling, pushing him, and flailing her arms in an effort to reach Alexa. (Def. 56.1 Reply ¶ 31). During this encounter, Ms. Rosario struck John in the face, at which time John and a second officer (whom the Court understands to be Daniel Morogiello) immediately took action to place Ms. Rosario under arrest, including seizing her and moving her to a location on the street, approximately 15 feet away from where the encounter with the two women had taken place. (Id. at ¶¶ 32-33). Plaintiff attempted to follow the two officers but was pushed back by Sergeant Cherry, who acted to prevent Plaintiff from interfering with his wife's arrest. (Id. at ¶ 34). Despite being pushed back by law enforcement, Plaintiff walked to where his wife was being handcuffed 15 feet away; according to Defendants, Plaintiff placed his hand on John's back and told him, “You don't shove a [expletive] woman like that.” (Id. at ¶¶ 35-36).

Plaintiff recalls the facts differently: At the outset, Plaintiff notes that Officer John did not testify that Ms. Rosario resisted or intentionally struck him. (Pl. 56.1 Reply ¶ 31). Instead, Plaintiff avers that Ms. Rosario became hostile because the officers were pushing her and allowing the two women to shout at her, and she began to speak with flailing arms. (Id.). Ms. Rosario swung at one of the two women and inadvertently hit John in the face, at which time officers “got physical” with Ms. Rosario and began to shove her before slamming her against a car door approximately 15 feet away. (Id. at ¶¶ 32-33). Plaintiff admits following behind as the officers pushed his wife.

(Id. at ¶ 34).^[5] Plaintiff also admits walking to where his wife was being handcuffed and telling Officer John, “You don't shove a [expletive] woman like that” as he heard his wife cry out in pain, though he denies touching John. (Id. at ¶¶ 35-36).

Defendants are adamant that video footage of the incident depicts Plaintiff's hand on Officer John's shoulder. (Def. 56.1 Reply ¶ 36; Def. Br. 7-8; Def. Reply 4). However, while the video footage does show Plaintiff raising his arms (and thus his hands) as he approached John, it is not clear to the Court that Plaintiff ever made physical contact with John. (See Bringle BWC at 3:45:44; LAVO Video). Defendants also aver, based on Officer John's deposition testimony, that Plaintiff used a “threatening tone” (Def. Br. 8) and “yell[ed] at” John (Def. Reply 4) when telling him, “You don't touch a [expletive] woman like that.” (See also John Dep. 85:2 (describing Plaintiff as “screaming at” Officer John)). In fact, the video demonstrates that although Plaintiff was obviously inebriated, he did not raise his voice. At this stage of the litigation, the Court accepts Plaintiff's assertion that he did not touch Officer John. See Batista v. City of New York, No. 17 Civ. 1994 (KPF), 2020 WL 1659785, at *8 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 3, 2020).

Officer John testified that he was unaware that Plaintiff was behind him until the moment Plaintiff told him, “You don't shove a [expletive] woman like that” (John Dep. 68:11-69:16), and nothing in the video footage contradicts that testimony. John reacted to Plaintiff's denunciation by turning away from Ms. Rosario and toward Plaintiff and yelling, “What are you [expletive] stupid?” (Def 56.1 Reply ¶¶ 37-38). While John remained with Ms. Rosario, three officers - Sergeant Cherry, Officer Zapata, and non-party Officer Victoria Acevedo - walked Plaintiff backwards until reaching the building wall adjacent to LAVO, where they turned Plaintiff around, pushed him back against the wall, and handcuffed him. (Id. at ¶ 39). Plaintiff describes this moment as being “pushed so hard that it felt like he was lifted off the ground until they slammed him into the wall in a very strong handed fashion before he was spun around and slammed...