Shuman v. Raritan Twp.

DENNIS SHUMAN, Plaintiff, v. RARITAN TOWNSHIP, RARITAN TOWNSHIP POLICE DEPARTMENT,POLICE OFFICER AAORN ROTH #57, POLICE OFFICER D.S. CARSON #48,POLICE OFFICER NICKLAS BUCK #27, POLICE OFFICER SCOTT LESSIG,POLICE CHIEF GLENN TABASKO, OFFICER ROBERT GODOWN,OFFICER L. CEVASCO, JOHN DOES 1-5 and ABC entities 1-5(as yet unknown and unidentified jail officials, supervisors,agents or employees or entities, Defendants.

Civil Action No. 14-3658 (FLW)(LHG)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

November 30, 2016

Not For Publication

OPINION

Hon. Freda L. Wolfson, U.S.D.J.:

Plaintiff Dennis Shuman ("Plaintiff" or "Shuman") initiated this action against defendants Raritan Township, Raritan Township Police Department, Police Officer D.S. Carson, Police Officer Aaron Roth, Lieutenant Nicklas Buck, Sergeant Scott Lessig, and Police Chief Glenn Tabasko (collectively, the "Raritan Defendants"), as well as Police Officer Robert Godown (collectively, with the Raritan Defendants, "Defendants"), for violations of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 arising out of Plaintiff's arrest for a disorderly persons offense in violation of N.J.S.A. 2C:29-1, following his alleged interference with a traffic stop in Raritan Township, New Jersey, early on the morning of August 5, 2012, at approximately 1:30 a.m. Plaintiff alleges that several police officers on duty that night used excessive force in effecting Plaintiff's arrest, and that the municipality of Raritan and the officers' supervisors failed to adequately train and supervise Officer Carson, violating Plaintiff's constitutional rights. The Complaint also includes New Jersey common law claims for assault and battery, negligence, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and abuse of process and authority; and a claim under the New Jersey Civil Rights Act ("NJCRA"). Presently before the Court are two motions: (1) the Raritan Defendants' motion for summary judgment on Plaintiff's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim, NJCRA claim, and New Jersey common law claim for infliction of emotional distress; and (2) Officer Godown's motion for summary judgment on Plaintiff's § 1983 and NJCRA claims. For the reasons that follow, the Court grants in part and denies in part the motion of the Raritan Defendants and grants the motion of Officer Godown. Plaintiff's § 1983 and NJCRA claims against Sergeant Lessig and Officer Godown are dismissed as barred by qualified immunity. Plaintiff's § 1983 and NJCRA claims on the basis of municipal liability against Raritan Township are dismissed as barred by the Supreme Court's decision in Monell v. Dep't of Soc. Servs., 436 U.S. 658 (1978). Plaintiff's § 1983 and NJCRA claims on the basis of supervisory liability against Police Chief Tabasko, Lieutenant Buck, and Sergeant Lessig are dismissed. The Raritan Defendants' motion for summary judgment on Plaintiff's § 1983 and NJCRA claims as raised against Officer Carson is denied. The Raritan Defendants' motion for summary judgment on Plaintiff's New Jersey common law claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress is granted. Additionally, by consent of the parties, all claims against the Raritan Township Police Department, and any punitive damages claim against Raritan Township, are dismissed with prejudice.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND & PROCEDURAL HISTORY

This matter concerns Plaintiff's claim that the Defendant Officers of the Raritan Township and Flemington Police Departments used excessive force in effecting Plaintiff's arrestafter Plaintiff interfered with one of the Defendant Officer's routine traffic stop of Plaintiff's daughter. Before recounting the events of the arrest itself, it is helpful to understand the history of Plaintiff's family's interaction with the Raritan Township and Flemington Police Departments. Between June and August 2012, the Plaintiff's daughter, Alexa Shuman, was stopped for various traffic violations on four occasions by Defendant Officers Roth and Carson. Roth Tr. 68:4-68:18. On June 11, 2012, Alexa Shuman was stopped by Officer Carson for crossing over the fog line with her passenger side tires. Exhibit C, Incident Report, p. 60. Officer Roth was on the scene to assist. Roth Tr. 75:10-76:2. Alexa Shuman, who was traveling with two passengers, consented to a search and Officer Carson found a cigar with marijuana in it in Alexa's possession and cocaine in the backpack of one of Alexa Shuman's passengers. Exhibit C, Incident Report, 6/11/12. Alexa Shuman was charged with possession and for the traffic offense. The drug charges were dismissed and Alexa Shuman paid a fine and pled guilty to the traffic infraction. Exhibit U.

Alexa Shuman was stopped by Officer Carson again on June 16, 2016, for having an air freshener on her rearview mirror. Officer Roth again was on scene to assist. Alexa Shuman again consented to a search and was found in possession of an empty plastic baggie. She was charged with possession of drug paraphernalia and the traffic offense. The drug charge was dismissed and Alexa Shuman again pled guilty to the traffic charge. Exhibit C; Roth Tr. 79:2-79:17.

On August 4, 2012, Alex Shuman was stopped by Officer Roth for touching or crossing a white line. Alexa Shuman refused a search and was let go. Roth Tr. 89-91.

The fourth stop, which is the subject of this case, took place shortly thereafter, early in the morning of August 5, 2012, at approximately 1:26 a.m. Officer Carson stopped Alexa Shuman, who was driving northbound on Route 202/Route 31, for entering a jug handle without the use of a turn signal. RaritanDefendants' Statement of Facts, ¶ 1. Alexa Shuman pulled her car into the northbound shoulder and Officer Carson parked his vehicle immediately behind her, leaving a few feet between the two vehicles. At approximately 1:28 a.m., Officer Carson exited his patrol car and walked to the open driver side window of Alexa Shuman's vehicle. Mobile Video Recording ("MVR") at timestamp 1:28:00.¹

As he was standing next to Alexa Shuman's vehicle, Officer Carson overheard Alexa Shuman speaking to a male on her Bluetooth. Raritan Statement, ¶ 4. Officer Carson stood next to Alexa Shuman's open driver side window for roughly one minute, as a voice, which is clearly audible in the MVR and recognizable as that of Plaintiff Dennis Shuman, had a conversation with Alexa Shuman. MVR at 1:28:28. At 1:29 a.m., Officer Carson walked back to his patrol car. MVR at 1:29:13. At 1:30 a.m., a dark colored sedan pulled into the southbound shoulder of Route 202/Route 31, directly opposite Alexa Shuman's vehicle and Officer Carson's patrol car. MVR at 1:30:49 (while the vehicle can be seen pulling into the shoulder, it goes off screen before coming to a stop).

The parties dispute what happened next. Plaintiff contends that as he was approaching the scene of the traffic stop from his car parked across the street, the first thing he did was identifyhimself as the father of Alexa Shuman, the driver of the stopped car. Shuman Tr. 60:14-18. Officer Carson disputes this account and claims that he did not know who Plaintiff was until sometime after Plaintiff's arrest and was concerned for his and Alexa Shuman's safety. Raritan Statement at ¶ 9; Carson Dep. 111:23-112:7.

The MVR did not pick up any voices during the period after Plaintiff initially exited his sedan and began walking toward the scene of the traffic stop. The first person who can be heard speaking after the sedan arrives is Officer Carson, who repeatedly said in a loud voice "Get back in your car." MVR at 1:31:09. At approximately 1:31 a.m., Officer Carson told Plaintiff "Sir you're standing in an active roadway, get back in your car or you're under arrest." MVR at 1:31:17-19. Officer Carson claims that he said this because he believed Plaintiff might be endangering himself by standing in an active roadway in the dark. [Carson Dep. 140:2-23]. Coming into view of the MVR for the first time, Plaintiff walked in front of Officer Carson's patrol car, in the space between it and Alexa Shuman's car, coming to a stop off screen near the curb roughly in between the two parked vehicles. Plaintiff then said "Now I'm over on the shoulder." MVR at 1:31:19-20.

Officer Carson again instructed Plaintiff to get back in his car or he would be placed under arrest. Plaintiff responded by asking Officer Carson if the chief was on duty that night. MVR at 1:31:26-27. Officer Carson did not respond, instead again ordering Plaintiff to get back into his car and asking Plaintiff "Do you hear what I'm saying?" Id. at 1:31:31-32. Plaintiff responded "I hear what you're saying. I'm calling the chief right now." Id. at 1:31:32-35. As Plaintiff was saying this, he reappears in the MVR footage moving away from the curb, back toward the middle of the road, again walking in front of Officer Carson's patrol car and behind Alexa Shuman's car. Id. Plaintiff can be seen dialing his phone. In walking back toward the middle of the street, Plaintiff passed directly in front of Officer Carson, who was standing nearthe right front headlight of his patrol car. As Plaintiff walked past him, Officer Carson turned and followed closely behind Plaintiff, in a parallel path closer to his patrol car. Id. From this point, the incident, as recorded by the MVR, transpired very quickly.

At 1:31:36 a.m., Officer Carson, still following behind Plaintiff, again instructed Plaintiff to get back into his car.

At 1:31:37 a.m., still walking away from Officer Carson, Plaintiff can be heard to say "Okay." Over the next two seconds, from 1:31:38 a.m. to 1:31:39 a.m. however, Plaintiff stopped walking, turned his upper body toward Officer Carson, who was following about a foot behind, and said "You are harassing my daughter." Plaintiff then turned his upper body back in the direction of the middle of the street and away from Officer Carson. Plaintiff began moving forward, back toward Plaintiff's car parked across the street.

By 1:31:40 a.m., just one second after having said "You are harassing my daughter" Plainti...