Karen Hickey-Mach v. Michele Rafferty, John Rafferty, and City of New York

Summary

The Eastern District of New York granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s federal civil rights claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The court held that the plaintiff failed to plausibly allege that the private defendants acted under color of state law or jointly with state officials. The court declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state-law claims for civil conspiracy and intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress.

Holdings

1. The amended complaint did not plausibly allege that the Raffertys were state actors or acted jointly with state officials. Allegations that the Raffertys provided information to police, even if false, that Michele was a cooperative witness, and that John had prior experience as a police officer were insufficient to establish joint action or a conspiracy with state officials.
2. The court declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state-law claims after dismissing all claims over which it had original federal-question jurisdiction.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the amended complaint plausibly alleged that the private Rafferty defendants acted under color of state law or engaged in joint action with state officials sufficient to support liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
2. Whether the court should exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state-law claims after dismissing all federal claims.

Disposition

dismissed