Rojas et al v. West Haven et al

Filing 65

ORDER denying 41 MOTION to Dismiss by Robert Fazzino, Thomas Flaherty, Christopher Nolan, Christopher Zitnay. Signed by Judge Warren W. Eginton on 3/3/14. (Ladd-Smith, I.)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT
HELEN ROJAS, IRMA RIVERA,
ALEJANDRO AZANA, and A.V.
and H.V., by next of friend
IRMA RIVERA,
Plaintiffs,

:
:
:
:
:
:
v.
:
:
CITY OF WEST HAVEN, CHIEF OF
:
POLICE JOHN KARAJANIS,
:
SERGEANT RON CELENTANO,
:
OFFICER BRIAN BOGERT, OFFICER :
MICHAEL WOLF, OFFICER DEBBIE :
D’AMATO, OFFICER SCOTT
:
BLOOM, OFFICER CHRISTOPHER
:
NOLAN, OFFICER CHRISTOPHER
:
ZITNAY, OFFICER THOMAS
:
FLAHERTY, and OFFICER ROBERT :
FAZZINO,
:
Defendants.
:

No. 3:10cv2011 (WWE)

RULING ON MOTION TO DISMISS
Plaintiffs Helen Rojas, Irma Rivera, Alejandro Azana and A.V. and H.V. assert
civil rights and Connecticut common law tort actions against West Haven, its Chief of
Police and several West Haven police officers. Officers Christopher Nolan, Christopher
Zitnay, Thomas Flaherty and Robert Fazzino have filed a motion to dismiss the claims
asserted against them in the amended complaint as time barred. For the following
reasons, the Court will deny the motion to dismiss.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiffs commenced this lawsuit on December 21, 2010 alleging that their
constitutional rights were violated on October 25, 2009, when the West Haven police

1

entered plaintiff Irma Rivera’s apartment.
On October 19, 2012, plaintiffs filed a motion to amend the complaint and join
Officers Nolan, Zitnay, Flaherty, and Fazzino as defendants. Plaintiffs had attached the
amended complaint to their motion to amend. On October 22, 2012, the motion to
amend was granted. However, the amended complaint was not filed on the docket until
January 24, 2013.
Defendants Nolan, Zitnay, Flaherty and Fazzino now move to dismiss the
amended complaint against them as time barred.
DISCUSSION
The function of a motion to dismiss is “merely to assess the legal feasibility of the
complaint, not to assay the weight of the evidence which might be offered in support
thereof.” Ryder Energy Distrib. v. Merrill Lynch Commodities, Inc., 748 F.2d 774, 779
(2d Cir. 1984). When deciding a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, the Court
must accept all well-pleaded allegations as true and draw all reasonable inferences in
favor of the pleader. Hishon v. King, 467 U.S. 69, 73 (1984). The complaint must
contain the grounds upon which the claim rests through factual allegations sufficient “to
raise a right to relief above the speculative level.” Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S.
544, 555 (2007). A plaintiff is obliged to amplify a claim with some factual allegations to
allow the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the
alleged conduct. Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009).
Defendants maintain that plaintiffs’ civil rights claims are barred by the three year
Connecticut statute of limitations applicable to Section 1983 actions. Lounsbury v.
Jeffries, 25 F.3d 131, 134 (2d Cir. 1994). Plaintiffs’ claims for assault and battery and
2

intentional infliction of emotional distress are also subject to a three year statute of
limitations. Decorso v. Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, 78 Conn. App. 865, 873
(2003) (intentional infliction of emotional distress); Daoust v. McWilliams, 49 Conn. App.
715, 720 (1998) ) (assault and battery). In this instance, the three year limitations
period expired on October 23, 2012, one day subsequent to the date that the Court
granted the motion to amend.
The claims for recklessness and maliciousness, negligence, and negligent
infliction of emotional distress are governed by the two year statute of limitations for
actions related to negligence, misconduct or malpractice. Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-584.
Upon review, the Court will deny the motion to dismiss on the basis of the
relation back doctrine that allows for additional defendants to be named in an amended
complaint filed past the expiration of a statute of limitations if the allegations relate back
to the original complaint. VKK Corp. v. Nat’l Football League, 244 F.3d 114, 128 (2d
Cir. 2001); Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(c). The Court must consider whether (1) both complaints
arise out of the same conduct, transaction or occurrence, (2) the additional defendants
were omitted from the original complaint due to a mistake of identity, and (3) the
additional defendants are not prejudiced by the delay. VKK Corp., 244 F.3d at 128;
See Krupski v. Costa Crociere S.p.A.., 560 U.S. 538, 547 (2010). In Krupski, the
Supreme Court indicated that the “mistake” requirement does not bar relation back for a
plaintiff who failed to name a defendant due to lack of knowledge of that defendant’s
name. Id. at 548; Archibald v. City of Hartford, 274 F.R.D. 371, 377 (D. Conn. 2011).
In this instance, the amended complaint concerns the same incidents and events
that occurred in plaintiff Irma Rivera’s apartment on October 25, 2009. Plaintiffs assert
3

that the additional defendants were part of the West Haven “Street Crime Unit” who had
been mistakenly or incorrectly identified by the police report first obtained by plaintiffs.
Plaintiffs identified the correct defendants through depositions with other officer
defendants in August and late-September 2012. The Court notes that prejudice to the
additional defendants is minimized by the fact that defendants had notice of the lawsuit
when it was originally filed in 2010, all defendants have participated in the discovery,
and all defendants are represented by the same law firm.
Plaintiffs should have acted in a more timely manner to file the amended
complaint. However, in light of plaintiffs’ diligent discovery efforts and the minimal
prejudice to defendants, the Court will allow the amended complaint under the relation
back doctrine. Accordingly, the motion to dismiss will be denied.
CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, the motion to dismiss [doc. #41] is DENIED.

DATED this _3rd__th day of March, 2014, at Bridgeport, Connecticut.

________/s/__________________
WARREN W. EGINTON
SENIOR U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE

4