McGovern v. City of Jersey City

McGovern v. City of Jersey City

Opinion

LETTER OPINION

ORIGINAL TO BE FILED WITH THE CLERK OF THE COURT

Motion for Reconsideration

Dear Parties:

Currently before the Court is Plaintiff Sean McGovern's motion  [*2] for reconsideration pursuant to L. Civ. R. 7.1(i). Plaintiff asks the Court to reconsider its September 27, 2007 opinion and order granting in part and denying in part Defendants' motion for summary judgment on Plaintiff's First Amendment retaliation claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. For the reasons set forth below, the Court grants Plaintiff's motion.

I. Factual and Procedural History

The parties are familiar with the facts: they were recited fully in the Court's January 6, 2006 opinion and reiterated briefly in its September 27, 2007 opinion. Therefore, the Court will only recount an abridged version of the facts relevant to this motion in this letter opinion.

Plaintiff is a sheriff's officer with the Hudson County Sheriff's Office ("Sheriff's Office"). Defendants are Hudson County, the Sheriff's Office, and Hudson County Sheriff Joseph Cassidy (collectively, the "Hudson County Defendants" or "Defendants"). On November 27, 1997, Plaintiff was involved in an altercation with various members of the Jersey City Police Department--including Patricia Cassidy, Sheriff Cassidy's daughter, and Richard Garrison, Patricia's one-time boyfriend--outside the Park Tavern in Jersey City. Plaintiff filed  [*3] various petitions arising out of this incident, including the instant action in which he alleges, inter alia, that Sheriff Cassidy retaliated against him for filing such petitions in violation of the First Amendment.

On January 6, 2006, this Court granted the Hudson County Defendants' motion for summary judgment as to Plaintiff's First Amendment speech claims and addressed other various motions for summary judgment. See Opinion (Jan. 6, 2006) at p. 24. The Court did not review Plaintiff's Petition Clause claims at that time as the Hudson County Defendants had not briefed said issue. See id. at p. 24 n.8. Therefore, the Court denied Defendants' motion for reconsideration as to that issue. On July 18, 2006, Defendants filed a renewed motion for summary judgment which was subsequently stricken by Magistrate Judge Ronald J. Hedges as violative of a discovery order and filed without the Court's consent. In its February 1, 2007 opinion, this Court affirmed Judge Hedges' decision, but granted Defendants leave to file a new motion for summary judgment on Plaintiff's Petition Clause claim.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.