Roman v. City Of New York
- Andrew Carter
- 1:17-cv-02697
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Roman v. City of New York, Judge Carter granted defendants’ summary-judgment motion after finding no clear error in the recommendation.
The ruling ended Jerome Roman’s claims against the City of New York, Detective David Terrell, and Officers Wilfredo Benitez, Gilberto Rodriguez, Yadarquiris Molina, and Corey Wooten by granting their summary-judgment motion.
What happened
In Roman v. City of New York, Jerome Roman sued the City of New York, a New York Police Department detective, and four officers. He alleged false arrest, malicious prosecution, denial of a fair trial, and claims against the City based on its policies or practices.
The defendants asked for summary judgment, which asks the court to decide a case without a trial when the record shows no genuine dispute requiring one. Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn recommended granting the motion in full. The parties received notice of their right to object, but neither side filed objections.
The court found no clear error, adopted Judge Netburn’s recommendation in full, and granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment. The order was issued by Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr.
The detailed version
- Roman v. City Of New York · No. 1:17-cv-02697
- Andrew Carter
- Mar. 29, 2020
Background
Jerome Roman brought the action against the City of New York, New York Police Department Detective David Terrell, and New York Police Department Officers Wilfredo Benitez, Gilberto Rodriguez, Yadarquiris Molina, and Corey Wooten. In his amended complaint, Roman asserted claims against the detective and officers for false arrest, malicious prosecution, and denial of a fair trial. He also asserted claims against the City based on municipal policies or practices.
Motion and Recommendation
The defendants filed a motion for summary judgment on May 14, 2019. Summary judgment is a decision without a trial when the record does not present a genuine dispute requiring trial. The motion was referred to Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn, who issued a Report and Recommendation on February 4, 2020. She recommended that the defendants’ motion be granted in its entirety.
The Report notified the parties that they could file objections within 14 days after service. No objections were filed. The court therefore reviewed the Report for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake in the record or reasoning.
Ruling
Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr. found no clear error in the record and adopted Judge Netburn’s Report and Recommendation in its entirety. The court granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment. The opinion does not separately describe the reasoning supporting each underlying claim beyond adopting the Report.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.