Hoegemann v. Palma

          RULING AND ORDER ON MOTIONS TO DISMISS

          VICTOR A. BOLDEN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         Richard Hoegemann (“Plaintiff”) brings this Complaint against East Haven Police Officer Donato Palma and Connecticut Parole Officers Jennifer Desena, James Long, Frank Mirto, Randy Lagana, Michael Cardona, Kate Fortuna, and Sheila Thompson. Specifically, Mr. Hoegemann asserts that Mr. Lagana and Mr. Cardona violated Mr. Hoegemann's rights under the Fourteenth Amendment, and Mr. Mirto, Ms. Desena, Mr. Long, Ms. Furtuna, Ms. Thompson, Mr. Palma violated Mr. Hoegemann's rights under the Fourth Amendment.

         Mr. Palma now moves to dismiss the Complaint, or, in the alternative, he asks the Court to enter summary judgment in his favor. ECF No. 17.

         Mr. Lagana and Mr. Cardona have moved to dismiss the Complaint. ECF No. 28 Ms. Fortuna and Ms. Thompson have moved to dismiss the Complaint. ECF No. 29.

         For the following reasons, the Court GRANTS Mr. Lagana and Mr. Cardona's motion to dismiss and GRANTS Ms. Fortuna and Ms. Thompson's motion to dismiss. The Court DENIES Mr. Palma's motion to dismiss without prejudice to renewal.

         I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

         On August 26, 2016, Mr. Hoegemann, proceeding pro se, sued East Haven Police Officer Donato Palma and Connecticut Parole Officers Jennifer Desena, James Long, Frank Mirto, Randy Lagana, Michael Cardona, Kate Fortuna and Sheila Thompson. ECF No. 1. Specifically, Mr. Hoegemann asserted that Mr. Lagana and Mr. Cardona violated Mr. Hoegemann's rights under the Fourteenth Amendment; Mr. Mirto, Ms. Desena, Mr. Long, Ms. Furtuna, Ms. Thompson, and Mr. Palma violated Mr. Hoegemann's rights under the Fourth Amendment; Defendants violated his Fifth, Sixth, and Eighth Amendment rights; and Ms. Desena violated his First Amendment rights. Mr. Hoegemann also brought claims under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981 and 1985 and 18 U.S.C. §§ 241 and 242.

         On February 2, 2017, the Court issued an Initial Review Order under 28 U.S.C. § 1915, dismissing all claims but Mr. Hoegemann's § 1983 claims under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments. ECF No. 8. Mr. Hoegemann's claims under the Fourteenth Amendment's due process clause against Mr. Lagana and Mr. Cardona; the Fourth Amendment against Mr. Mirto, Ms. Desena, Mr. Long, Ms. Furtuna, Ms. Thompson, and Mr. Palma for false arrest and unreasonable search and seizure; and the Fourth Amendment against Ms. Desena, Mr. Long, and Mr. Palma for violation of Mr. Hoegemann's right to privacy survived. All claims are against Defendants in their personal capacities.

         On April 25, 2017, counsel appeared on behalf of Mr. Hoegemann. ECF No. 22.

         Mr. Palma has moved to dismiss the Complaint under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6), or, in the alternative, under summarily enter judgment against Mr. Hoegemann under Fed. R. Civ. P.

         Mr. Lagana and Mr. Cardona have moved to dismiss the Complaint as against them. ECF No. 28. Ms. Fortuna and Ms. Thompson have also moved to dismiss as against them. ECF No. 29.

         II. STANDARD OF REVIEW

         A complaint must contain a “short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a). The Court will dismiss any claim that fails “to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6).

         The Court may also grant summary judgment if the record shows no genuine issue as to any material fact, and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(a). The moving party bears the initial burden of establishing the absence of a genuine ...