Zeng v. Chell

Background

Xiamin Zeng brought claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal civil-rights statute, and New York state law. An earlier order had dismissed her claims for false arrest, malicious prosecution, denial of a fair trial, abuse of criminal process, and municipal liability. The remaining claims were against Detective Danielle Febus for excessive force and deliberate indifference to medical needs and unconstitutional confinement conditions under § 1983, plus assault and battery claims against Detective Febus and the City of New York under state law.

Zeng went to a police station on January 31, 2018, after being told to pick up her son. She waited for about three hours, reported difficulty breathing, and asked for water and bathroom access. Detective Febus arrested her after a system check showed an active investigation card stating there was probable cause to arrest her. Febus placed one handcuff on Zeng’s wrist and did not loosen it when Zeng complained of pain. Zeng was handcuffed for no more than 100 minutes and was denied bathroom access for approximately five hours, according to the undisputed timeline described by the court. She later alleged that the handcuffs caused wrist injuries.

Court’s reasoning

The defendants moved for summary judgment, which asks whether the undisputed evidence requires judgment without a trial. They argued that Zeng’s federal claims should be dismissed and that Detective Febus was protected by qualified immunity, a legal protection that can shield government officials from certain damages claims. Zeng did not respond to the arguments concerning her federal claims or qualified immunity. Her lawyer expressly stated at the motion hearing that she had abandoned the federal claims. The court therefore treated those claims as abandoned and dismissed them.

After dismissing all federal claims, the court declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state-law claims. Supplemental jurisdiction is a federal court’s authority to decide related state-law claims in the same case. The court determined that dismissing the assault and battery claims against Detective Febus and the City of New York was appropriate under this circumstance.

Disposition

The court granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment. It dismissed Zeng’s § 1983 excessive-force and deliberate-indifference claims against Detective Febus. It dismissed without prejudice Zeng’s New York assault and battery claims against Detective Febus and the City of New York. The Clerk was directed to enter judgment dismissing the action, close pending motions, and close the case.