Free Motion for Summary Judgment - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut


File Size: 29.6 kB
Pages: 3
Date: November 21, 2003
File Format: PDF
State: Connecticut
Category: District Court of Connecticut
Author: unknown
Word Count: 390 Words, 2,362 Characters
Page Size: Letter (8 1/2" x 11")
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/ctd/23096/13.pdf

Download Motion for Summary Judgment - District Court of Connecticut ( 29.6 kB)


Preview Motion for Summary Judgment - District Court of Connecticut
Case 3:03-cv-00725-MRK

Document 13

Filed 11/24/2003

Page 1 of 3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT

ROBERT GRIMM v. JOHN KRUPINSKY

: : : : :

NO.: 3:03CV00725 (MRK)

NOVEMBER 21, 2003

DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c) and D. Conn. L. R. 56, the defendant, John Krupinsky, hereby moves for summary judgment in his favor as to the single-count Complaint against him. As more particularly set forth in the attached Memorandum of Law in support of this motion, the defendant offers: 1. Probable cause existed as a matter of law to support the defendant's

decisions to seek arrest warrant applications for the plaintiff based on the undisputed facts of this case. The existence of probable cause is a complete defense to plaintiff's claims of malicious prosecution and false arrest. 2. If the Court declines to find probable cause as a matter of law, the

defendant had "arguable probable cause" to support his decisions to seek arrest warrants for the plaintiff. The defendant is therefore protected from liability by the doctrine of qualified immunity.

ORAL ARGUMENT REQUESTED

Case 3:03-cv-00725-MRK

Document 13

Filed 11/24/2003

Page 2 of 3

3.

In addition, plaintiff's malicious prosecution claim is barred since his

underlying criminal charges did not result in a "favorable termination," as required for plaintiff to proceed with such a claim. As required by D. Conn. L. R. 56(a)1, a Statement of Material Facts Not In Dispute has been simultaneously filed with this Motion. As required by D. Conn. L. R. 7(a)1, a Memorandum of Law has been simultaneously filed in support of this motion. WHEREFORE, the defendant prays that this Court grant his Motion for Summary Judgment.

DEFENDANT, JOHN KRUPINSKY

By___/s/ Thomas R. Gerarde____ Thomas R. Gerarde ct05640 Howd & Ludorf 65 Wethersfield Avenue Hartford, CT 06114 (860) 249-1361 (860) 249-7665 (Fax) E-Mail: [email protected]

2

Case 3:03-cv-00725-MRK

Document 13

Filed 11/24/2003

Page 3 of 3

CERTIFICATION This is to certify that a copy of the foregoing has been sent, handling charges prepaid, via U.S. Mail to the following counsel of record this 21st day of November, 2003.

Norman A. Pattis, Esquire Williams and Pattis, LLC 51 Elm Street, Suite 409 New Haven, CT 06810

____/s/ Thomas R. Gerarde_____ Thomas R. Gerarde

3