UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
June 23, 2009
EDWARD P. GRIFFIN-NOLAN, PLAINTIFF,
CITY OF SYRACUSE; DANIEL CECILE POLICE OFFICER; JAMES MULLEN, POLICE OFFICER; AND DAVID HENNESSEY, POLICE OFFICER, DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hon. Glenn T. Suddaby, United States District Judge
Currently before the Court in this civil rights action filed by Edward P. Griffin-Nolan ("Plaintiff") is a motion for summary judgment filed by the City of Syracuse, and Syracuse Police Officers Daniel Cecile, James Mullen, and David Hennessey ("Defendants"). (Dkt. No. 39.) On June 23, 2009, the Court heard oral argument on Defendants' motion, and issued a bench decision granting the motion. At that time, the Court indicated that a written Order would follow. This is that Order. The Court having carefully considered the parties' motion papers and argument on Defendants' motion for summary judgment, it is
ORDERED that Defendants' motion for summary judgment seeking the dismissal with prejudice of all of Plaintiff's claims (Dkt. No. 39) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part in the following respects:
(1) Plaintiff's Section 1983 claim against Officers Mullen and Hennessey for denying him his First Amendment right to be free from retaliation is DISMISSED with prejudice;
(2) Plaintiff's Section 1983 claim against the City of Syracuse for denying him his First Amendment right to be free from retaliation is DISMISSED with prejudice;
(3) Plaintiff's Section 1983 claim against the City of Syracuse for failing to adequately train Officers Mullen, Hennessey, and Cecile is DISMISSED with prejudice;
(4) Plaintiff's New York State common law claim against all Defendants for malicious prosecution, and his New York State common law claim against Officer Hennessey for libel, are DISMISSED without prejudice to refiling in New York State Court within THIRTY (30) DAYS of this Order, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(d); and
(5) Plaintiff's claim for attorney's fees pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1988 is DISMISSED with prejudice; and it is further
ORDERED that Plaintiff's Complaint (Dkt. No. 1) is DISMISSED in its entirety; and it is further
ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall enter a judgment accordingly and close this action.
© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.