Razzoli v. City of New York

Background

The complaint was construed as asserting a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal civil-rights statute, based on an allegedly false arrest. On February 2, 2017, the court stayed the civil case while Razzoli’s underlying criminal case was pending.

Razzoli later objected to the delay in trial and argued that the stay violated his constitutional rights. Magistrate Judge James L. Cott overruled that objection on December 15, 2020, and directed that the stay remain in place because the criminal case had not yet been resolved. Razzoli filed a timely objection to Judge Cott’s order. A later status letter stated that Razzoli’s appeal of his criminal conviction had been adjourned to the March 2021 term.

Court’s analysis

The district court reviewed Judge Cott’s non-dispositive order under the standard requiring modification or setting aside of any part that is clearly erroneous or contrary to law. The court explained that a false-arrest claim may be barred if the plaintiff is convicted of the crime for which he was arrested, unless the criminal result has been overturned or otherwise invalidated. The court also relied on the rule that a district court may stay a civil action involving issues related to a pending criminal case until the criminal matter ends.

The court found that Razzoli had not identified a constitutional right violated by the stay. It also concluded that the Sixth Amendment speedy-trial right does not apply to civil cases.

Disposition

Judge Lorna G. Schofield held that the December 15, 2020, order was not clearly erroneous. The court ordered that Razzoli’s objection be overruled and stated that lifting the stay was premature because the underlying criminal case had not been resolved. The court further ordered the defendants to serve Razzoli, who was representing himself, with a copy of the order by January 15, 2021.