Anilao et al v. Spota et al

Filing 31

ORDER granting in part and denying in part 25 Motion to Dismiss; granting in part and denying in part 14 Motion to Dismiss; granting in part and denying in part 15 Motion to Dismiss. For the reasons set forth in the attached Memorandum and Ord er, the Court grants in part and denies in part defendants' motions to dismiss. Specifically, as to the County defendants, the Court concludes: (1) the individual County defendants are entitled to absolute immunity for conduct taken in their ro le as advocates in connection with the presentation of the case to the Grand Jury; (2) the individual County defendants are not entitled to absolute immunity for alleged misconduct during the investigation of plaintiffs, and the Court cannot determin e at the motion to dismiss stage, given the allegations in the Amended Complaint, whether the individual County defendants are entitled to qualified immunity for their actions in the investigation phase; (3) plaintiffs have sufficiently pled § 1 983 claims against the individual County defendants for alleged Due Process violations in the investigative stage; and (4) plaintiffs have sufficient pled a claim for municipal liability against the County of Suffolk. As to the defendants Philipson, Luyun, Rubenstein, Sentosa Care, Prompt, and Avalon Gardens, the Court concludes: (1) plaintiffs have sufficiently alleged that they were acting under color of state law, and (2) plaintiffs have sufficiently pled claims for malicious prosecution and false arrest under both § 1983 and state law, as well as a § 1983 conspiracy claim. As to defendants O'Connor and Fitzgerald, the Court dismisses the claims against them without prejudice for: (1) failure to plead that they were acti ng under color of state law, and (2) failing to satisfy the elements of the state-law malicious prosecution and false arrest claims as to these two individual defendants. Finally, as to the § 1983 conspiracy claim against all defendants, the Co urt finds that plaintiffs have sufficiently pled a claim against all defendants except O'Connor and Fitzgerald, who, as noted supra, were not alleged to have been acting under color of state law for purposes of the § 1983 claims. Ordered by Judge Joseph F. Bianco on 3/31/2011. (Graves, Kelly)