Mosby v. City Of New York

Background

Maggalean Mosby brought claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the City of New York, Police Officers Joseph Aliberti, Luigi Tirro, and an unnamed John Doe officer. She alleged denial of a fair trial through fabricated evidence, excessive force, false arrest, and failure to intervene.

On October 4, 2018, Mosby and her friend, Geraldine Jeanty, were at a TGI Friday’s restaurant when police responded to a fight involving another customer. During the officers’ efforts to arrest Jeanty, the parties disputed what happened between Mosby and Tirro. Mosby said she was standing near Tirro, did not touch an officer, and was thrown to the floor without warning. The defendants said Mosby grabbed Tirro’s arm and was against his back, leading Tirro to swing his arms and throw her off. The parties agreed that Mosby ended up on the floor and was handcuffed, and that she suffered a cut, bruising, and wrist discoloration.

Mosby was arrested and charged with harassment in the second degree, obstructing governmental administration in the second degree, and resisting arrest. She was released on her own recognizance, later accepted an adjournment in contemplation of dismissal, and made one post-arraignment court appearance.

Summary-judgment rulings

The court granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment in part and denied it in part. Mosby consented to dismissal of her claims against the City, her failure-to-intervene claim against Aliberti concerning Tirro’s alleged excessive force, and her claim against Tirro concerning Aliberti’s arrest of Mosby. The court granted summary judgment on those claims and dismissed them.

The court also granted summary judgment to Tirro on Mosby’s false-arrest claim. It denied summary judgment to Aliberti on the false-arrest claim because factual disputes prevented a determination that probable cause existed for any of the charges. The court also declined to grant Aliberti qualified immunity, which can protect government officials from damages when their conduct did not violate clearly established law, because the same factual disputes prevented a decision that he had even arguable probable cause.

The court denied summary judgment on Mosby’s excessive-force claim against Tirro. Viewing the evidence in Mosby’s favor, a jury could find that Tirro used excessive force if Mosby was merely standing near him and he threw her to the floor without warning. The court also held that the factual disputes prevented it from deciding Tirro’s qualified-immunity defense at that stage.

The court denied summary judgment to Aliberti on Mosby’s fabrication-of-evidence claim. A jury could find that Aliberti falsely described the incident in the police report, to the assistant district attorney, and in the criminal complaint; that the information could have influenced a criminal jury; and that the prosecution caused liberty-related harms beyond the initial arrest. The court granted summary judgment to Tirro on Mosby’s claim that he failed to intervene in Aliberti’s alleged fabrication. The evidence did not create a factual dispute showing that Tirro knew what was in the criminal complaint or had an opportunity to prevent the alleged violation.

Disposition

The conclusion states that defendants’ motion for summary judgment was granted for the claims against the City, the false-arrest claim against Tirro, and the failure-to-intervene claims against Aliberti and Tirro, and otherwise denied. The court directed the clerk to terminate the motion and set trial for January 16, 2023.