Thank You For Submiting Feedback!
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
April 18, 2018, Argued; November 7, 2018, Decided
Docket No. 17-970-cv
[*22] LOHIER, Circuit Judge:
This case requires us primarily to consider whether New York law can alter the standard that applies to the "favorable termination" element of a malicious prosecution claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. In 2012 law enforcement officials in New York repeatedly arrested and charged David Lanning Jr. ("Lanning"), allegedly at the direction of Lanning's estranged wife and the Glens Falls police officer with whom she was romantically involved. After the criminal charges against Lanning were dismissed, he filed a § 1983 suit against the City of Glens Falls, the Glens Falls Police Department, and Officer Ryan Ashe (collectively, the "City Defendants"), as well as the County of Warren, the Warren County Sheriff's Department, the Warren County District Attorney's Office, and Officer Kevin Conine, Jr. (collectively, the "County Defendants"), claiming malicious prosecution in violation [**3] of the Fourth Amendment and denial of the right to equal protection of the laws in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. The United States District Court for the Northern District of New York (D'Agostino, J.) dismissed Lanning's complaint on the pleadings.
Consistent with the traditional common law of torts, we hold that ] a plaintiff asserting a malicious prosecution claim under § 1983 must still show that the underlying criminal proceeding ended in a manner that affirmatively indicates his innocence. We AFFIRM because Lanning has not plausibly pleaded that the criminal proceedings against him were terminated in a manner that indicates he was innocent of the charges, and because he failed to state a claim under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.
908 F.3d 19 *; 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 31489 **
DAVID LANNING JR., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF GLENS FALLS, GLENS FALLS POLICE DEPARTMENT, RYAN ASHE, IN HIS OFFICIAL AND INDIVIDUAL CAPACITIES, COUNTY OF WARREN, WARREN COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, WARREN COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, KEVIN CONINE, JR., IN HIS OFFICIAL AND INDIVIDUAL CAPACITIES, Defendants-Appellees.
Prior History: David Lanning Jr. brought suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the City of Glens Falls, the Glens Falls Police Department, Officer Ryan Ashe, the County of Warren, the Warren County Sheriff's Department, the Warren County District Attorney's Office, and Officer Kevin Conine, Jr. He alleged that the Defendants maliciously prosecuted him in violation of the Fourth Amendment and denied him equal protection of the laws in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment [**1] . The United States District Court for the Northern District of New York (D'Agostino, J.) granted the Defendants' motions for judgment on the pleadings, holding, among other things, that Lanning failed to plead that the criminal proceedings against him had been terminated in his favor. Concluding that New York State law cannot alter the standard that applies to the "favorable termination" element of a federal constitutional claim of malicious prosecution, which requires the plaintiff to show that the proceedings ended in a manner that affirmatively indicates his innocence, we AFFIRM.
Lanning v. City of Glens Falls, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 32878 (N.D.N.Y., Mar. 8, 2017)
malicious prosecution claim, terminated, innocence, charges, favorable termination, district court, malicious prosecution, arrest, criminal proceeding, common law, Appeals, courts, equal protection claim, pleadings, criminal contempt, criminal charge, second degree, state law, principles
Torts, Intentional Torts, Malicious Prosecution, Civil Rights Actions, Elements, Favorable Termination, Civil Procedure, Judgments, Pretrial Judgments, Judgment on Pleadings, Appeals, Standards of Review, Standards of Review, De Novo Review, Civil Rights Law, Scope, Law Enforcement Officials, Search & Seizure, Constitutional Law, Fundamental Rights, Search & Seizure, Scope of Protection, Protection of Rights, Section 1983 Actions, Elements, Procedural Matters, Federal Versus State Law, Equal Protection, Nature & Scope of Protection, Defenses, Demurrers & Objections, Motions to Dismiss, Failure to State Claim, Government Actions, Governments, Local Governments, Claims By & Against