Mendelson v. Evans

Background

Mildred B. Mendelson brought claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and New York law against the Town of Pound Ridge, New York, Police Officer Jonathan J. Evans, and Detective Gregory E. Walz. She alleged excessive force and asserted state-law claims for battery and prima facie tort based on an April 11, 2019, encounter at the Pound Ridge Police Department. Mendelson claimed that Evans and Walz ignored and laughed at her complaint, forcibly removed her from the building, and arrested her for disorderly conduct.

The pending motions were the defendants’ motion for partial summary judgment and Mendelson’s cross-motion for sanctions under 28 U.S.C. § 1927. The parties disputed what Mendelson told the defendants’ former lawyers, James A. Randazzo and his firm, Portale Randazzo, LLP, when she sought a consultation before that firm later represented the defendants. The firm withdrew from representing the defendants in March 2022.

Section 1983 Claim Against the Town

The court granted the defendants’ motion for partial summary judgment on Mendelson’s Section 1983 claim against the Town of Pound Ridge. A municipality may be liable under Section 1983 when an official policy or custom causes a constitutional injury. Under the rule commonly called Monell liability, a plaintiff may rely on evidence that a policymaking official ordered or ratified the employee’s conduct.

Mendelson argued that Town Supervisor Kevin Hansan ratified the officers’ conduct by congratulating them after the altercation and that Police Chief David Ryan ratified it by calling the conduct justified. The court held that the evidence did not show that either official approved an unconstitutional basis for the officers’ conduct. It also held that Mendelson presented no evidence from which a jury could find that the alleged excessive force was part of a recurring pattern or practice rather than an isolated incident.

The court noted that Mendelson did not respond to arguments concerning other alleged bases for municipal liability, including failure to train officers and failure to implement preventive policies. The court deemed those theories abandoned. The court therefore granted the motion with respect to the Section 1983 claim against the Town, and the Clerk was directed to terminate the Town as a defendant.

State-Law Claims Against the Individual Defendants

The court denied the defendants’ motion for partial summary judgment on Mendelson’s state-law claims against Evans and Walz. The defendants argued that Mendelson’s failure to file a timely notice of claim required dismissal. Under New York law, a notice of claim is required for certain actions against a municipality or municipal employees when the municipality has a statutory obligation to indemnify the employees.

The court concluded that battery and prima facie tort are intentional torts, and that New York law generally does not require a municipality to indemnify employees for intentional wrongdoing or recklessness. The court also found a genuine factual dispute because Mendelson submitted sworn statements alleging that Evans laughed at her and aggressively pushed her, causing her to hit her head on a refrigerator. The court held that the alleged conduct could fall outside the officers’ employment duties and that failure to serve a notice of claim was therefore not a basis for dismissing these claims. The state-law claims against Evans and Walz may proceed.

Sanctions Motion

The court denied Mendelson’s cross-motion for sanctions. Sanctions under Section 1927 or the court’s inherent authority require clear evidence that the challenged conduct was entirely without merit and undertaken in bad faith, such as for harassment or delay.

The court found some evidence that Mendelson may have been a prospective client of Portale Randazzo, but no evidence that Randazzo received information that could significantly harm her in the matter. The information supported by the record concerned the history of the dispute and documents likely to be disclosed in discovery. Mendelson’s generalized assertions that she disclosed litigation strategy and settlement information did not provide the clear evidence needed to establish bad faith. The court also found no evidence that the defendants’ early motion or settlement conduct was improperly based on information allegedly obtained from Mendelson.

The court did not decide whether a full attorney-client relationship had formed between Mendelson and Portale Randazzo. It stated that even if such a relationship existed, Mendelson still had not shown clear evidence of bad faith sufficient to support sanctions.

Disposition

Judge Vincent L. Briccetti granted in part and denied in part the defendants’ motion for partial summary judgment: it was granted with respect to the Section 1983 claim against the Town of Pound Ridge and denied with respect to the state-law claims against Evans and Walz. The court denied the cross-motion for sanctions. The court directed the Clerk to terminate the Town as a defendant and terminate the pending motions, and scheduled a case-management conference for August 25, 2022.