Parker v. Zugibe

Background

Aaron E. Parker sued Officer Phillip Fantasia under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal law allowing claims against state actors for violating constitutional rights. Parker alleged that Fantasia violated the Fourth Amendment by searching Parker’s apartment on September 15, 2015, based on a search warrant bearing a forged signature of Justice Alan Simon. Parker also alleged that the search damaged and seized his property.

After an earlier ruling dismissed several claims and defendants, the remaining claims concerned the alleged forged warrant and property damage from the search. Fantasia moved for summary judgment, which asks whether the evidence shows that no reasonable jury could find for the opposing party. Parker did not file a formal response after the motion was filed, but the court reviewed his earlier submissions in light of his status as a self-represented litigant. Parker also asked for a handwriting expert, which the court treated as a request for additional discovery under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(d).

Additional Discovery

The court denied the request for additional discovery. Parker did not submit the required affidavit or declaration identifying the facts he sought, explaining how he would obtain them, showing how they could create a genuine factual dispute, or describing his efforts to obtain them. The court also noted that Parker had received notice of these requirements.

Alleged Forgery of the Search Warrant

The court held that Parker did not produce evidence from which a reasonable jury could conclude that Justice Simon’s signature was forged. Parker relied on his own statements, a statement from Patricia Mortel, and differences he claimed to see between copies of the warrant. The court characterized these assertions as conclusory and found that Parker had not explained the basis for believing the signature was forged. Parker acknowledged that he had no handwriting-analysis training and had not consulted a handwriting expert.

In contrast, Fantasia and Justice Simon each submitted sworn statements that Simon reviewed the warrant application and signed the duplicate original warrants on September 14, 2015. The record also included the search warrant, court records, and a transcript showing that Fantasia later confirmed before Justice Simon that he had received and executed the warrant. The court concluded that the evidence showed a valid warrant supported by probable cause and describing the place to be searched and property to be seized. It therefore granted Fantasia’s motion as to Parker’s Fourth Amendment forgery claim.

The court also rejected Parker’s argument that the dismissal of a weapons indictment supported his forgery allegation. The court relied on the state court’s order, which stated that the indictment’s presentation was defective because of improper instructions to the grand jury and allowed the prosecution to present the charges again. The court found no evidence that the indictment had been dismissed because of a forged warrant or unlawful search.

Property Damage

The court separately addressed Parker’s property-damage claim. It explained that excessive or unnecessary destruction during a search may violate the Fourth Amendment, but a plaintiff must show more than ordinary disorder from executing a warrant and must provide evidence that officers acted unreasonably or maliciously.

Parker alleged generally that his home and property were destroyed, but he did not identify specific property that was damaged. Photographs attached to a proposed amended complaint that Parker later withdrew appeared to show, at most, general disarray. The court found that Parker had not produced evidence creating a genuine factual dispute about unreasonable or malicious damage. It therefore granted summary judgment on this claim as well.

Disposition

Judge Karas granted Fantasia’s motion for summary judgment. The court directed the Clerk of Court to terminate the pending motion, enter judgment for Fantasia, close the case, and mail Parker a copy of the opinion and order.