Conte v. County of Nassau, New York et al

Filing 462

ORDER denying 390 Motion for Summary Judgment; granting 404 Motion for Summary Judgment; granting in part and denying in part 407 Motion for Summary Judgment; granting in part and denying in part 409 Motion for Summary Judgment; granting in p art and denying in part 411 Motion for Summary Judgment. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, as set forth in the attached Memorandum and Order, that after a detailed review of the record and submissions of the parties, the Court grants defendants' motions for summary judgment in part and denies the motions for summary judgment in part. Specifically, the Court concludes that the County defendants are entitled to summary judgment on plaintiff's claims for malicious prosecution, violation of the Fi rst Amendment, and conspiracy under § 1983. The Court further determines that plaintiff's federal and state-law false arrest (against defendant Wasilausky) and abuse of process (against all County defendants but Sardo) claims survive summa ry judgment because of disputed issues of material fact with respect to those claims. Plaintiff's Monell claim against the County of Nassau also survives summary judgment. The Court also concludes that defendant Sardo is entitled to summary ju dgment on all claims against her on grounds of absolute immunity as to the federal and state-law false arrest claims and lack of personal involvement with respect to the other claims, and defendants Emmons, Wallace, and Falzarano are entitled to summ ary judgment on the federal and state-law false arrest claim, because of lack of sufficient evidence of personal involvement in the investigation that led to the arrest. With respect to plaintiff's remaining state-law claims, the Court denies t he County defendants and Guerra summary judgment on plaintiff's tortious interference with contractual relationships claim and grants summary judgment to defendant Shaska on that claim. Plaintiff's remaining state-law claims for defamation , injurious falsehood, and intentional infliction of emotional distress are barred by the statute of limitations as against all defendants. Finally, with respect to plaintiff's motion for summary judgment, the same disputed issues of fact that preclude summary judgment in defendants' favor on the remaining claims also preclude summary judgment in plaintiff's favor. SO ORDERED. Ordered by Judge Joseph F. Bianco on 9/30/2010. (Weisgerber, Erica)