If no lawyer is listed, call 918-582-6422 and MoreLaw will help you find a lawyer for free.

Defendant's Attorney: Brittany Murray and Stevie Darrel Chambers

Description: Newark, New Jersey personal injury lawyer represented Plaintiff, who sued defendants on civil rights violation theories.

Plaintiff's allegations against Defendants and the procedural history of this matter are described in detail in the District Court's March 29, 2022 Opinion [D.E. 42]. In her initial Complaint [D.E. 1], Plaintiff sued Jersey City, the Jersey City Police Department, Officer Zylkiewicz, and various John/Jane Does pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1983. Plaintiff alleged that after a Jersey City police car collided with her vehicle, Officer Zylkiewicz emerged from the police car, yelled at her, and was soon joined by additional officers who surrounded her car, shouted at her, and intimidated her. [D.E. 1]. The Complaint alleged in Counts One and Two, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, that Jersey City police officers violated her rights under the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and the New Jersey Civil Rights Act (“NJCRA”), N.J. Stat. Ann. § 10-6.2, because they (1) detained, arrested, and charged her primarily due to her race, and (2) exercised excessive force in screaming at her, surrounding her, arresting her, and repeatedly administering a breathalyzer test on her. [D.E. 1 ¶¶ 51-69]. She alleged in Count Three that the officers conspired to deprive her of her civil rights in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1985 and the NJCRA. Id. ¶¶ 70-73.

On July 13, 2021, Defendants moved to dismiss the Complaint, arguing Plaintiff's claims against Jersey City should be dismissed because she failed to properly allege municipal liability. The District Court agreed and held that Plaintiff failed to plead sufficiently that the alleged constitutional violations were caused by a policy or custom adopted by Jersey City or the Jersey City Police Department.[1] Specifically, the District Court found that Plaintiff's claim that the conduct at issue was the result of an official policy or custom rested solely on the allegation that high-ranking police officers were inside the police station when Plaintiff's constitutional rights were allegedly being violated outside. The District Court found that Plaintiff failed to allege sufficient details concerning how this alleged tacit approval constituted an official declaration of municipal policy or a municipal course of conduct, and that Plaintiff's remaining allegations lacked detail and were conclusory. Accordingly, the District Court dismissed Counts One, Two, and Three as to Jersey City without prejudice, and granted Plaintiff leave to file an amended
complaint that attempts to remedy those deficiencies. The District Court did not address the claims against Officer Zylkiewicz and those claims remain pending.

In her proposed Amended Complaint [D.E. 44], Plaintiff seeks to cure the deficiencies identified by the District Court. She also adds two additional proposed causes of action against Jersey City and Officer Zylkiewicz. In amended Count One, Plaintiff asserts a claim for an unreasonable search and seizure in violation of the Fourth Amendment, based on her allegations that Officer Zylkiewicz unreasonably arrested her and seized her car without probable cause. In amended Count Two, Plaintiff asserts a claim for an alleged failure to provide her with due process in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment, based on her allegations that Officer Zylkiewicz wrongfully detained, arrested, and seized Plaintiff's person and property, and that Jersey City wrongfully prosecuted her without due process.

Outcome: For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff's motion is granted in part and denied part. Plaintiff's motion for leave to amend is granted as to Officer Zylkiewicz and denied as to Jersey City.

Accordingly, IT IS on this 12th day of August 2022, ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion for leave to file an Amended Complaint [D.E. 44] is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part; and it is further

ORDERED that Plaintiff's request for leave to amend her claims against Officer Zylkiewicz is GRANTED; and it is further

ORDERED that Plaintiff's request for leave to amend her claims against Jersey City is DENIED; and it is further

ORDERED that, as set forth in D.E. 46, fact discovery is closed and will not be reopened; and it is further

ORDERED that, within five business days of the entry of this Order, the parties shall file a joint status letter that shall include a proposed schedule for the filing of Officer Zylkiewicz's response to the Amended Complaint and for the completion of expert discovery. In that letter, the parties shall also indicate whether they prefer to proceed with or reschedule the status conference already set for September 7, 2022, at 3:00 p.m. If they wish to reschedule the status conference, the parties shall propose alternative dates on which they are available for the conference.

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments: