Preview
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 07/28/2023 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 726805/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/28/2023
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF QUEENS
----------------------------------------------------------------------- x
JOSE SANDOVAL, SUMMONS
Plaintiff, Index No.:
-against- The Basis of Venue is:
Location of Incident
THE CITY OF NEW YORK, THE NEW YORK TAXI
AND LIMOUSINE COMMISSION, PEACE OFFICER Plaintiff designates Queens
JOHN DESANTIS, Tax Reg. 350759, NEW YORK County as the place of trial.
TAXICAB AND LIMOUSINE COMMISSION JOHN
DOES NUMBERS ONE THROUGH TEN, NYPD
POLICE OFFICERS JOHN DOES NUMBERS ONE
THROUGH TEN,
Defendants.
----------------------------------------------------------------------- X
To the above named Defendants:
You are hereby summoned to answer the Verified Complaint in this action, and to serve
a copy of your Verified Answer to the Verified Complaint, or, if the Verified Complaint is not
served with this Summons, to serve a notice of appearance on the Plaintiff's attorneys within
twenty days after the service of this Summons, exclusive of the day of service, where service is
made by delivery upon you personally within the state, or, within 30 days after completion of
service where service is made in any other manner. In case of your failure to appear or answer,
judgment will be taken against you by default for the relief demanded in the complaint.
DATED: New York, New York
December 3, 2021
Yours, etc.
Cary London, Esq.
Shulman-Hill, PLLC
Attorneys for Plaintiff
1 State Street Plaza
15th Floor
New York, New York 10004
(212) 203-1090
TO: THE CITY OF NEW YORK, Corporation Counsel, 100 Church Street, NY, NY 10007
NEW YORK TAXI AND LIMOUSINE COMMISION, TLC Legal Affairs, 33 Beaver
Street, 22nd Floor
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 07/28/2023 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 726805/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/28/2023
TLC PEACE OFFICER JOHN DESANTIS, TLC Legal Affairs, 33 Beaver Street, 22nd
Floor
-2-
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 07/28/2023 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 726805/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/28/2023
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF QUEENS
----------------------------------------------------------------------- x
JOSE SANDOVAL,
INDEX NO.:
Plaintiff,
VERIFIED COMPLAINT
-against-
THE CITY OF NEW YORK, THE NEW YORK TAXI
AND LIMOUSINE COMMISSION, PEACE OFFICER JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
JOHN DESANTIS, Tax Reg. 350759, NEW YORK
TAXICAB AND LIMOUSINE COMMISSION JOHN
DOES NUMBERS ONE THROUGH TEN, NYPD
POLICE OFFICERS JOHN DOES NUMBERS ONE
THROUGH TEN,
Defendants.
----------------------------------------------------------------------- X
Plaintiff JOSE SANDOVAL, by his attorneys, Shulman-Hill, PLLC, as and for his Verified
Complaint herein, alleges upon information and belief as follows:
PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
1. This is a civil rights action to recover money damages arising out of
defendants’ violation of Plaintiff’s rights as secured by the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. Sections
1983 and 1988, and of rights secured by the Fourth, Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the
United States Constitution, and the common law and the laws of the State of New York. On
August 2, 2019, at approximately 3:00 p.m., Plaintiff Jose Sandoval, while lawfully in the
vicinity of John F. Kennedy Airport, in Jamaica, NY, more specifically the Terminal 5 Access
Road, was subject to an unlawful arrest, detention, assault, battery and excessive use of force by
defendant Officers. In doing so, defendant Officers punched Plaintiff in the face, causing serious
physical injury and loss of consciousness necessitating hospital treatment. Plaintiff was deprived
of his constitutional, common law and statutory rights when the individual defendants unlawfully
stopped, detained, assaulted, battered, subjected to excessive force, passed along false
accusations to prosecuting attorneys and engaged in the malicious prosecution of Plaintiff, in
violation of the Fourth, Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, the
common law and the laws of the State of New York.
PARTIES
2. Plaintiff Jose Sandoval is a resident of the state of New York.
-3-
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 07/28/2023 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 726805/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/28/2023
3. Taxi and Limousine Commission Peace Officer John DeSantis, Tax Reg.#
350759, is and was at all times relevant herein an Officer with the New York City Taxi and
Limousine Commission.
4. Taxi and Limousine Commission Peace Officer John DeSantis, Tax Reg.#
350759 is being sued in their individual and official capacity.
5. Currently and at all times relevant herein, Taxi and Limousine Commission
Peace Officer John DeSantis, Tax Reg.# 350759 was assigned to work for New York Taxi and
Limousine Commision.
6. Taxi and Limousine Commission Peace Officers John Does #1-10 are and
were at all times relevant herein officers, employees, and agents of the New York City Taxi and
Limousine Commission.
7. Taxi and Limousine Commission Peace Officers John Does #1-10 are being
sued in their individual and official capacities.
8. At all times relevant herein, the Taxi and Limsouine Commission Peace
Officer defendants were acting under color of state law in the course and scope of their duties
and functions as agents, servants, employees and officers of the New York City Taxi and
Limsouine Commission, and otherwise performed and engaged in conduct incidental to the
performance of their lawful functions in the course of their duties. They were acting for and on
behalf of the New York City Taxi and Limsouine Commission at all times relevant herein, with
the power and authority vested in them as officers, agents and employees of the New York City
Taxi and Limsouine Commission and incidental to the lawful pursuit of their duties as officers,
employees and agents of the New York City Taxi and Limsouine Commission.
9. New York City Police Officers John Does #1-10 are and were at all times
relevant herein officers, employees, and agents of the New York City Police Department.
10. New York City Police Officers John Does #1-10 are being sued in their
individual and official capacities.
11. At all times relevant herein, the New York City Police Officer defendants
were acting under color of state law in the course and scope of their duties and functions as
agents, servants, employees and officers of the New York City Police Department, and otherwise
performed and engaged in conduct incidental to the performance of their lawful functions in the
course of their duties. They were acting for and on behalf of the New York City Police
Department at all times relevant herein, with the power and authority vested in them as officers,
agents and employees of the New York City Police Department and incidental to the lawful
pursuit of their duties as officers, employees and agents of the New York City Police Department.
12. Defendant City of New York is a municipal entity created and authorized
under the laws of the State of New York. It is authorized by law to maintain a police department,
which acts as its agent in the area of law enforcement and for which it is ultimately responsible.
-4-
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 07/28/2023 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 726805/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/28/2023
The defendant City of New York assumes the risks incidental to the maintenance of a police
force and the employment of police officers as said risks attach to the public consumers of the
services provided by the New York City Police Department and the New York City Taxi and
Limsousine Commission Enforcement Division.
13. Plaintiff in furtherance of his causes of action brought pursuant to New York
State law filed a timely Notice of Claim against the CITY OF NEW YORK in compliance with
the Municipal Law Section 50 and in accordance with New York State law.
14. In accordance with New York State law and General Municipal Law Section
50, Plaintiff testified at a hearing held pursuant to General Municipal Law Section 50-H.
15. More than thirty (30) days have elapsed since service of said Notice of Claim
was filed and THE CITY OF NEW YORK has failed to pay or adjust the claims.
16. This action falls within one or more of the exceptions as set forth in CPLR
Section 1602, involving intentional actions, as well as the defendant, and/or defendants, having
acted in reckless disregard for the safety of others, as well as having performed intentional acts.
17. Plaintiff has sustained damages in an amount in excess of the jurisdictional
limits of all the lower Courts of the State of New York.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
18. On August 2, 2019, at approximately 3:00 p.m., Plaintiff was present in the
vicinity of John F. Kennedy Airport, in Jamaica, New York, more specifically the Terminal 5
Access Road, when the defendant Peace Officers unlawfully assaulted and arrested Plaintiff
without legal justification.
19. Plaintiff came to the airport that day to pick up a family member.
20. As Plaintiff was leaving the terminal, he was approached by a defendant Taxi
and Limousine Commission (“TLC”) Peace Officer without warning or reason.
21. The TLC Peace Officer told Plaintiff to stop and tapped Plaintiff on the
shoulder.
22. As Plaintiff turned around, he was punched hard in the face from his
blindside.
23. Plaintiff lost consciousness and fell the ground.
24. Plaintiff regained consciousness as he was being handcuffed on the ground.
25. Plaintiff’s injuries from the arrest include physical trauma to his head, wrist,
neck, legs and body.
-5-
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 07/28/2023 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 726805/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/28/2023
26. Other TLC officers on the scene of Plaintiff’s arrest and involved in Plaintiff’s
subsequent transport to an NYPD location did nothing to assist, provide Plaintiff with medical
care, or otherwise intervene to prevent the continuing unlawful detention.
27. Plaintiff was taken to the 113 Precinct of the New York City Police
Department where he was photographed, fingerprinted and placed in a holding cell.
28. While Plaintiff was at the 113 Precinct, none of the defendant Police Officers
provided him with medical care or otherwise intervened to prevent his continuing unlawful
detention.
29. After approximately 12 hours, Plaintiff was transported to Central Bookings.
30. On information and belief, during this time, defendant TLC Officers falsely
communicated, or had communicated on their behalf, allegations that Plaintiff had committed a
crime to Assistant District Attorneys at the Early Case Assessment Bureau for Queens County,
to wit: Trespass and related offenses.
31. Defendant TLC Officer DeSantis signed a criminal complaint charging
Plaintiff with the above-described charges, and attesting to manifestly false factual allegations,
on August 2, 2019.
32. Plaintiff was arraigned and released before a Judge of the Criminal Court of
Queens County after approximately 24 hours in custody.
33. The day after his release, Plaintiff went to the emergency room of Charlotte
Hungerford Hospital in Connecticut where he received medical treatment for the injuries he
sustained.
34. Plaintiff was also forced to hire a criminal defense attorney to fight these
unlawful and manifestly false charges.
35. Plaintiff had to attend at least four court dates during the pendency of his case.
36. Despite the manifestly false allegations involved in this case, the Queens
County District Attorney’s Office continued to maliciously and unlawfully prosecute the case
for several months.
37. Plaintiff’s criminal case was dismissed and sealed on January 27, 2020.
38. At no time relevant herein did Plaintiff commit a crime or violate the law in
any way, nor did the any defendant officers have an objective reason to accuse Plaintiff of
committing a crime or violating the law in any way.
-6-
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 07/28/2023 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 726805/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/28/2023
39. At no point did defendant officers recover any drugs, weapons, graffiti
instruments, or other illegal contraband from Plaintiff or from a location that was in Plaintiff's
possession, custody, or control.
40. Nevertheless, Plaintiff was unlawfully arrested and handcuffed by defendant
officers without legal justification or probable cause, unlawfully fingerprinted, photographed
and searched, and unlawfully detained.
41. Some of the police officer defendants observed the violation of Plaintiff’s
rights under the Constitution of the United States and New York State Law and did nothing to
prevent their fellow officers from unjustifiably assaulting, battering, and using excessive force
against Plaintiff.
42. The unlawful assault, battery, and use of excessive force by the individually
named defendants caused Plaintiff to sustain physical, psychological and emotional trauma.
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
Negligence
43. The Plaintiff repeats, reiterates and realleges each and every allegation
contained in the foregoing paragraphs with the same force and effect as if more fully set forth at
length herein.
44. Defendants owed a duty of care to Plaintiff.
45. To the extent defendants claim that the injuries to Plaintiff by the defendant
police officers was unintentionally caused and that the force used by the defendants against him
was unintentional, then the defendants breached that duty of care by knocking him unconscious
and causing serious injury to his head, wrists, legs and body.
46. As a direct and proximate result of such acts, defendants deprived Plaintiff
of his rights under the laws of the State of New York.
47. All of the foregoing occurred without any fault or provocation by Plaintiff.
48. Defendants were at all times agents, servants, and employees acting within
the scope of their employment by the City of New York, the New York City Taxi and Limousine
Commission, and the New York City Police Department, which are therefore responsible for
their conduct.
49. The City, as the employer of the officer defendants, is responsible for their
wrongdoing under the doctrine of respondeat superior.
50. As a result of the aforementioned conduct of defendants, Plaintiff sustained
injuries, including but not limited to emotional and psychological injuries.
-7-
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 07/28/2023 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 726805/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/28/2023
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
Unlawful Stop, Question, and Search
51. The Plaintiff repeats and realleges the foregoing paragraphs as if the same
were fully set forth at length herein.
52. The illegal approach, pursuit, stop and grab employed by defendants herein
terminated Plaintiff’s freedom of movement through means intentionally applied.
53. The conduct of defendants in approaching, stopping, and grabbing Plaintiff
was performed under color of law and without any reasonable suspicion of criminality or other
constitutionally required grounds.
54. As a direct and proximate result of such acts, defendants deprived Plaintiff of
his rights under the laws of the State of New York.
55. Defendants were at all times agents, servants, and employees acting within
the scope of their employment by the City of New York, the New York City Taxi and Limousine
Commission, and the New York City Police Department, which are therefore responsible for
their conduct.
56. The City, as the employer of the officer defendants, is responsible for their
wrongdoing under the doctrine of respondeat superior.
THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
Violation of Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment Rights:
Unlawful Seizure and Deprivation of Liberty
57. The Plaintiff repeats and realleges the foregoing paragraphs as if the same
were fully set forth at length herein.
58. The individually named police officer defendants, while acting in concert and
within the scope of their authority, caused Plaintiff to be seized, unlawfully searched, falsely
arrested, and falsely imprisoned, and maliciously prosecuted without reasonable suspicion
and/or probable cause, in violation of Plaintiff’s right to be free of an unreasonable seizure under
the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States and to be free of a deprivation
of liberty under the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
59. As a result of the aforementioned conduct of defendants, Plaintiff sustained
injuries, including but not limited to physical, emotional and psychological injuries.
FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
False Imprisonment
-8-
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 07/28/2023 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 726805/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/28/2023
60. The Plaintiff repeats and realleges the foregoing paragraphs as if the same
were fully set forth at length herein.
61. The acts and conduct of the defendants constitute false arrest and false
imprisonment under the laws of the State of New York. Defendants intended to confine Plaintiff
and, in fact, confined Plaintiff, and Plaintiff was conscious of the confinement. In addition,
Plaintiff did not consent to the confinement and the confinement was not otherwise privileged.
62. As a direct and proximate result of such acts, defendants deprived Plaintiff of
his rights under the laws of the State of New York and the United States Constitution.
63. Defendants were at all times agents, servants, and employees acting within
the scope of their employment by the City of New York, the New York City Taxi and Limousine
Commission, and the New York City Police Department, which are therefore responsible for
their conduct.
64. The City, as the employer of the officer defendants, is responsible for their
wrongdoing under the doctrine of respondeat superior.
65. As a result of the aforementioned conduct of defendants, Plaintiff sustained
injuries, including but not limited to loss of liberty, emotional and psychological injuries.
FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
Violation of Plaintiff’s Fourth And Fourteenth Amendment Rights:
Excessive Force
66. The Plaintiff repeats, reiterates and realleges each and every allegation
contained in the foregoing paragraphs with the same force and effect as if more fully set forth at
length herein.
67. The use of excessive force by defendants by, amongst other things, punching
Plaintiff in the face, knocking Plaintiff unconscious, and then roughly handcuffing, grabbing and
throwing Plaintiff into a vehicle constituted objectively unreasonable physical seizures of Plaintiff
in violation of his rights under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the
United States and to be free of a deprivation of liberty under the Fourteenth Amendment to the
Constitution of the United States.
68. Defendants were at all times agents, servants, and employees acting within the
scope of his employment by the City of New York, the New York City Taxi and Limousine
Commission, and the New York City Police Department, which are therefore responsible for their
conduct.
SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION
Assault
-9-
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 07/28/2023 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 726805/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/28/2023
69. The Plaintiff repeats, reiterates and realleges each and every allegation
contained in the foregoing paragraphs with the same force and effect as if more fully set forth at
length herein.
70. Defendants, their agents, servants and employees, acting within the scope of
their employment, intentionally, willfully and maliciously assaulted Plaintiff in that they had the
real or apparent ability to cause imminent harmful and/or offensive bodily contact and intentionally
did a violent and/or menacing act which threatened such contact to the Plaintiff, that such acts
caused apprehension of such contact in the Plaintiff.
71. As a direct and proximate result of such acts, defendants deprived Plaintiff of
his rights under the laws of the State of New York.
72. Defendants were at all times agents, servants, and employees acting within the
scope of their employment by the City of New York, the New York City Taxi and Limousine
Commission, and the New York City Police Department, which are therefore responsible for their
conduct.
73. The City, as the employer of the officer defendants, is responsible for their
wrongdoing under the doctrine of respondeat superior.
74. As a result of the aforementioned conduct of defendants, Plaintiff sustained
injuries, including but not limited to emotional and psychological injuries.
SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
Battery
75. The Plaintiff repeats, reiterates and realleges each and every allegation
contained in the foregoing paragraphs with the same force and effect as if more fully set forth at
length herein.
76. Defendants, their agents, servants and employees, acting within the scope of
their employment, intentionally, willfully and maliciously battered Plaintiff, when they, in a hostile
and/or offensive manner tased Plaintiff, roughly handcuffing, grabbing and throwing Plaintiff into
a vehicle and slamming Plaintiff’s foot against the vehicle brutally effecting an arrest of Plaintiff
without his consent and with the intention of causing harmful and/or offensive bodily contact to
the Plaintiff and caused such battery.
77. As a direct and proximate result of such acts, defendants deprived Plaintiff of
his rights under the laws of the State of New York.
78. Defendants were at all times agents, servants, and employees acting within the
scope of their employment by the City of New York, the New York City Taxi and Limousine
Commission, and the New York City Police Department, which are therefore responsible for their
conduct.
- 10 -
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 07/28/2023 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 726805/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/28/2023
79. The City, as the employer of the officer defendants, is responsible for their
wrongdoing under the doctrine of respondeat superior.
80. As a result of the aforementioned conduct of defendants, Plaintiff sustained
injuries, including but not limited to emotional and psychological injuries.
EIGTH CAUSE OF ACTION
Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress
81. The Plaintiff repeats, reiterates and realleges each and every allegation
contained in the foregoing paragraphs with the same force and effect as if more fully set forth at
length herein.
82. By the actions described herein, defendants, each acting individually and in
concert with each other, engaged in extreme and outrageous conduct, conduct utterly intolerable
in a civilized community, which negligently caused severe emotional distress to Plaintiff. The acts
and conduct of the defendants were the direct and proximate cause of injury and damage to Plaintiff
and violated Plaintiff’s statutory and common law rights as guaranteed by the laws and
Constitution of the State of New York.
83. The acts and conduct of the defendants were the direct and proximate cause of
injury and damage to Plaintiff and violated Plaintiff’s statutory and common law rights as
guaranteed Plaintiff by the laws and Constitution of the State of New York.
84. As a direct and proximate result of such acts, defendants deprived Plaintiff of
his rights under the laws of the State of New York.
85. Defendants were at all times agents, servants, and employees acting within the
scope of their employment by the City of New York, the New York City Taxi and Limousine
Commission, and the New York City Police Department, which are therefore responsible for their
conduct.
86. The City, as the employer of the officer defendants, is responsible for their
wrongdoing under the doctrine of respondeat superior.
87. As a result of the aforementioned conduct of defendants, Plaintiff sustained
injuries, including but not limited to emotional and psychological injuries.
NINTH CAUSE OF ACTION
Negligent Hiring, Retention, Training and Supervision
88. The Plaintiff repeats, reiterates and realleges each and every allegation
contained in the foregoing paragraphs with the same force and effect as if more fully set forth at
length herein.
- 11 -
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 07/28/2023 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 726805/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/28/2023
89. The City of New York and its employees, servants and/or agents acting within
the scope of their employment did negligently hire, retain, train and supervise defendants,
individuals who were unfit for the performance of police duties on the aforementioned dates at
the aforementioned locations.
90. As a result of the aforementioned conduct of defendants, Plaintiff sustained
injuries, including but not limited to physical, emotional and psychological injuries.
TENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
Failure to Intervene
91. The Plaintiff repeats, reiterates and realleges each and every allegation
contained in the foregoing paragraphs with the same force and effect as if more fully set forth at
length herein.
92. The defendants that did not physically touch Plaintiff, but were present when
other officers violated Plaintiff’s Constitutional Rights had an affirmative duty to intervene on
behalf of Plaintiff, whose constitutional rights were being violated in their presence by other
officers.
93. Defendants failed to intervene to prevent the unlawful conduct described
herein.
94. As a result of the foregoing, Plaintiff’s suffered serious, debilitating and
permanent injury, his liberty was restricted for an extended period of time, he was put in fear of
his safety, his injuries worsened, he did not receive necessary medical treatment, and he was
humiliated and subject to other physical constraints.
95. As a direct and proximate result of such acts, defendants deprived Plaintiff of
his rights under the laws of the State of New York.
96. Defendants were at all times agents, servants, and employees acting within
the scope of their employment by the City of New York, the New York City Taxi and Limousine
Commission, and the New York City Police Department, which are therefore responsible for
their conduct.
97. The City, as the employer of the officer defendants, is responsible for their
wrongdoing under the doctrine of respondeat superior.
98. As a result of the aforementioned conduct of defendants, Plaintiff sustained
injuries, including but not limited to emotional and psychological injuries.
ELEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
Violation of Fourth And Fourteenth Amendment Rights:
Denial of Right to Fair Trial/Due Process
- 12 -
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 07/28/2023 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 726805/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/28/2023
99. The Plaintiff repeats and realleges the foregoing paragraphs as if the same
were fully set forth at length herein.
100. Defendants, individually and collectively, manufactured and/or withheld
false evidence and forwarded this false evidence to prosecutors in the Queens County District
Attorney’s Office.
101. Defendants filled out false and misleading police reports and forwarded
them to prosecutors in the Queens County District Attorney’s Office.
102. Defendants signed false and misleading criminal court affidavits and
forwarded them to prosecutors in the Queens County District Attorney’s Office.
103. In withholding/creating false evidence against Plaintiff, and in
providing/withholding information with respect thereto, Defendants violated Plaintiff’s
constitutional right to due process and fair trial under the New York State Constitution and under
the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States and to
be free to deprivation of liberty under the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States
Constitution.
104. As a result of the foregoing, Plaintiff sustained, inter alia, loss of the right
to due process and a fair trial, loss of liberty, emotional distress, embarrassment and humiliation,
and deprivation of his constitutional rights.
105. Defendants were at all times agents, servants, and employees acting within
the scope of their employment by the City of New York, the New York City Taxi and Limousine
Commission, and the New York City Police Department, which are therefore responsible for
their conduct.
106. The City, as the employer of the officer Defendants, is responsible for their
wrongdoing under the doctrine of respondeat superior.
107. As a result of the aforementioned conduct of Defendants, Plaintiff sustained
injuries including, but not limited to: economic, emotional and psychological injuries.
TWELFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
Deliberate Indifference to Medical Needs
65. The Plaintiff repeats and realleges the foregoing paragraphs as if the same
were fully set forth at length herein.
66. Defendants despite being aware that Plaintiff, a man in his late 50’s had
been punched in the face and knocked unconscious thereby requiring medication and additional
treatment from medical professionals, delayed Plaintiff’s medical treatment and refused to
administer and properly procure immediate and adequate medical attention.
- 13 -
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 07/28/2023 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 726805/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/28/2023
67. The delay in medical treatment to Plaintiff’s injuries resulted in
hospitalization, increased severity in Plaintiff’s injuries that were suffered by Plaintiff that would
have been prevented if Plaintiff received treatment in a timely manner.
68. As a direct and proximate result of such acts, defendants deprived Plaintiff
of his rights under the laws of the State of New York.
69. Defendants were at all times agents, servants, and employees acting within
the scope of their employment by the City of New York, the New York City Taxi and Limousine
Commission, and the New York City Police Department, which are therefore responsible for
their conduct.
70. The City, as the employer of the officer defendants, is responsible for their
wrongdoing under the doctrine of respondeat superior.
71. As a result of the aforementioned conduct of defendants, Plaintiff sustained
injuries, including but not limited to emotional and psychological injuries.
THIRTEENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
Malicious Prosecution
108. The Plaintiff repeats and realleges the foregoing paragraphs as if the same
were fully set forth at length herein.
109. The acts and conduct of the Defendants constitute malicious prosecution
under the United States Constitution.
110. Defendants commenced and continued a criminal proceeding against
Plaintiff.
111. There was actual malice and an absence of probable cause for the criminal
proceeding against Plaintiff and for each of the charges for which they were prosecuted.
112. The prosecution and criminal proceedings terminated in Plaintiff’s favor on
the aforementioned dates.
JURY DEMAND
113. Plaintiff hereby demands trial by jury of all issues properly triable thereby.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff JOSE SANDOVAL demands judgment against the
defendants on each cause of action in amounts to be determined upon the trial of this action which
exceeds the jurisdiction of lower courts, inclusive of punitive damages and attorneys’ fees
inclusive of costs and disbursements of this action, interest and such other relief as is appropriate
- 14 -
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 07/28/2023 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 726805/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/28/2023
under the law. That the Plaintiff recover the cost of the suit herein, including reasonable attorney’s
fees pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1988.
Dated: New York, New York
December 3, 2021
By:
Cary London, Esq.
Shulman-Hill, PLLC
Attorneys for Plaintiff
1 State Street Plaza
15th Floor
New York, New York 10004
(212) 203-1090
TO: THE CITY OF NEW YORK, Corporation Counsel, 100 Church Street, NY, NY 10007
NEW YORK TAXI AND LIMOUSINE COMMISION, TLC Legal Affairs, 33 Beaver
Street, 22nd Floor
TLC PEACE OFFICER JOHN DESANTIS, TLC Legal Affairs, 33 Beaver Street, 22nd
Floor
- 15 -
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 07/28/2023 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 726805/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/28/2023
ATTORNEY'S VERIFICATION
CARY LONDON, an attorney duly admitted to practice before the Courts of the
State of New York, affirms the following to be true under the penalties of perjury:
I am a partner of the law firm of SHULMAN-HILL PLLC, I have read the annexed
VERIFIED COMPLAINT and know the contents thereof, and the same are true to my
knowledge, except those matters therein which are stated to be alleged upon information and belief,
and as to those matters I believe them to be true. My belief, as to those matters therein not stated
upon knowledge, is based upon facts, records, and other pertinent information contained in my
files. The reason this verification is made by me and not Plaintiff is because Plaintiff does not reside
in the county wherein I maintain my office.
DATED: New York, New York
December 3, 2021
______________________________
CARY LONDON
- 16 -
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 07/28/2023 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 726805/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/28/2023
April 6, 2022
VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL TO ECF
Hon. Sylvia O. Hinds-Radix
Corporation Counsel
New York City Law Department
100 Church Street
New York, New York 10007
RE: Jose Sandoval v. The City of New York, et al.
Index No.: 726805/2021
Law Dept. File No.: 2021-042566
Your Honor:
I am an attorney who represents JOSE SANDOVAL in the above-referenced case. In that
regard, enclosed please find: (1) Plaintiff’s Verified Bill of Particulars; (2) Plaintiff’s Response to
Defendant’s Demand for Discovery and Inspection; (3) Plaintiff’s Notice for Discovery and
Inspection; (4) Notice for Depositions; (5) an original 160.50 authorization executed by Plaintiff,
and (6) HIPAA-compliant authorizations executed by Plaintiff for Charlotte Hungerford Hospital.
The following documents are included in plaintiff’s document production annexed hereto, bates
numbered P1 through P39:
Criminal Court Documents P1-P7
Certificate of Disposition P8
Medical Records P9-P29
Photographs of Injuries P30-P38
50H Hearing Notice P39
1
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 07/28/2023 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 726805/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/28/2023
Thank you for your kind attention to this matter. Should you have any question or require
additional information, please feel free to contact me.
Very yours truly,
/s
C. Cass Luskin, Esq.
Enclosures
2
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 07/28/2023 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 726805/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/28/2023
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF QUEENS
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JOSE SANDOVAL,
VERIFIED BILL OF
Plaintiff,
PARTICULARS
-against-
Index No.: 726805/2021
THE CITY OF NEW YORK., THE NEW YORK TAXI AND
LIMOUSINE COMMISSION, PEACE OFFICER JOHN
DESANTIS, TAX REG. 350759, NEW YORK TAXICAB AND
LIMOUSINE COMMISSION JOHN DOES NUMBERS ONE
THROUGH TEN,
Defendants.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiff JOSE SANDOVAL, by and through his attorneys, SHULMAN AND HILL,
PLLC, as and for his Verified Bill of Particulars, hereby sets forth and alleges, upon information
and belief, as follows:
1. See Notice of Claim, dated October 25, 2019, and Verified Complaint, filed on
December 3, 2021. Plaintiff was unlawfully arrested on August 2, 2019, at approximately 3:00
p.m., on or in the vicinity of John F. Kennedy Airport, Jamaica, New York.
2. See Response to No. 1, above.
3. See Notice of Claim, dated October 25, 2019, and Verified Complaint, filed on
Dece
Preview
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 07/28/2023 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 726805/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/28/2023 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF QUEENS ----------------------------------------------------------------------- x JOSE SANDOVAL, SUMMONS Plaintiff, Index No.: -against- The Basis of Venue is: Location of Incident THE CITY OF NEW YORK, THE NEW YORK TAXI AND LIMOUSINE COMMISSION, PEACE OFFICER Plaintiff designates Queens JOHN DESANTIS, Tax Reg. 350759, NEW YORK County as the place of trial. TAXICAB AND LIMOUSINE COMMISSION JOHN DOES NUMBERS ONE THROUGH TEN, NYPD POLICE OFFICERS JOHN DOES NUMBERS ONE THROUGH TEN, Defendants. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- X To the above named Defendants: You are hereby summoned to answer the Verified Complaint in this action, and to serve a copy of your Verified Answer to the Verified Complaint, or, if the Verified Complaint is not served with this Summons, to serve a notice of appearance on the Plaintiff's attorneys within twenty days after the service of this Summons, exclusive of the day of service, where service is made by delivery upon you personally within the state, or, within 30 days after completion of service where service is made in any other manner. In case of your failure to appear or answer, judgment will be taken against you by default for the relief demanded in the complaint. DATED: New York, New York December 3, 2021 Yours, etc. Cary London, Esq. Shulman-Hill, PLLC Attorneys for Plaintiff 1 State Street Plaza 15th Floor New York, New York 10004 (212) 203-1090 TO: THE CITY OF NEW YORK, Corporation Counsel, 100 Church Street, NY, NY 10007 NEW YORK TAXI AND LIMOUSINE COMMISION, TLC Legal Affairs, 33 Beaver Street, 22nd Floor FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 07/28/2023 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 726805/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/28/2023 TLC PEACE OFFICER JOHN DESANTIS, TLC Legal Affairs, 33 Beaver Street, 22nd Floor -2- FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 07/28/2023 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 726805/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/28/2023 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF QUEENS ----------------------------------------------------------------------- x JOSE SANDOVAL, INDEX NO.: Plaintiff, VERIFIED COMPLAINT -against- THE CITY OF NEW YORK, THE NEW YORK TAXI AND LIMOUSINE COMMISSION, PEACE OFFICER JURY TRIAL DEMANDED JOHN DESANTIS, Tax Reg. 350759, NEW YORK TAXICAB AND LIMOUSINE COMMISSION JOHN DOES NUMBERS ONE THROUGH TEN, NYPD POLICE OFFICERS JOHN DOES NUMBERS ONE THROUGH TEN, Defendants. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- X Plaintiff JOSE SANDOVAL, by his attorneys, Shulman-Hill, PLLC, as and for his Verified Complaint herein, alleges upon information and belief as follows: PRELIMINARY STATEMENT 1. This is a civil rights action to recover money damages arising out of defendants’ violation of Plaintiff’s rights as secured by the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. Sections 1983 and 1988, and of rights secured by the Fourth, Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, and the common law and the laws of the State of New York. On August 2, 2019, at approximately 3:00 p.m., Plaintiff Jose Sandoval, while lawfully in the vicinity of John F. Kennedy Airport, in Jamaica, NY, more specifically the Terminal 5 Access Road, was subject to an unlawful arrest, detention, assault, battery and excessive use of force by defendant Officers. In doing so, defendant Officers punched Plaintiff in the face, causing serious physical injury and loss of consciousness necessitating hospital treatment. Plaintiff was deprived of his constitutional, common law and statutory rights when the individual defendants unlawfully stopped, detained, assaulted, battered, subjected to excessive force, passed along false accusations to prosecuting attorneys and engaged in the malicious prosecution of Plaintiff, in violation of the Fourth, Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, the common law and the laws of the State of New York. PARTIES 2. Plaintiff Jose Sandoval is a resident of the state of New York. -3- FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 07/28/2023 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 726805/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/28/2023 3. Taxi and Limousine Commission Peace Officer John DeSantis, Tax Reg.# 350759, is and was at all times relevant herein an Officer with the New York City Taxi and Limousine Commission. 4. Taxi and Limousine Commission Peace Officer John DeSantis, Tax Reg.# 350759 is being sued in their individual and official capacity. 5. Currently and at all times relevant herein, Taxi and Limousine Commission Peace Officer John DeSantis, Tax Reg.# 350759 was assigned to work for New York Taxi and Limousine Commision. 6. Taxi and Limousine Commission Peace Officers John Does #1-10 are and were at all times relevant herein officers, employees, and agents of the New York City Taxi and Limousine Commission. 7. Taxi and Limousine Commission Peace Officers John Does #1-10 are being sued in their individual and official capacities. 8. At all times relevant herein, the Taxi and Limsouine Commission Peace Officer defendants were acting under color of state law in the course and scope of their duties and functions as agents, servants, employees and officers of the New York City Taxi and Limsouine Commission, and otherwise performed and engaged in conduct incidental to the performance of their lawful functions in the course of their duties. They were acting for and on behalf of the New York City Taxi and Limsouine Commission at all times relevant herein, with the power and authority vested in them as officers, agents and employees of the New York City Taxi and Limsouine Commission and incidental to the lawful pursuit of their duties as officers, employees and agents of the New York City Taxi and Limsouine Commission. 9. New York City Police Officers John Does #1-10 are and were at all times relevant herein officers, employees, and agents of the New York City Police Department. 10. New York City Police Officers John Does #1-10 are being sued in their individual and official capacities. 11. At all times relevant herein, the New York City Police Officer defendants were acting under color of state law in the course and scope of their duties and functions as agents, servants, employees and officers of the New York City Police Department, and otherwise performed and engaged in conduct incidental to the performance of their lawful functions in the course of their duties. They were acting for and on behalf of the New York City Police Department at all times relevant herein, with the power and authority vested in them as officers, agents and employees of the New York City Police Department and incidental to the lawful pursuit of their duties as officers, employees and agents of the New York City Police Department. 12. Defendant City of New York is a municipal entity created and authorized under the laws of the State of New York. It is authorized by law to maintain a police department, which acts as its agent in the area of law enforcement and for which it is ultimately responsible. -4- FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 07/28/2023 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 726805/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/28/2023 The defendant City of New York assumes the risks incidental to the maintenance of a police force and the employment of police officers as said risks attach to the public consumers of the services provided by the New York City Police Department and the New York City Taxi and Limsousine Commission Enforcement Division. 13. Plaintiff in furtherance of his causes of action brought pursuant to New York State law filed a timely Notice of Claim against the CITY OF NEW YORK in compliance with the Municipal Law Section 50 and in accordance with New York State law. 14. In accordance with New York State law and General Municipal Law Section 50, Plaintiff testified at a hearing held pursuant to General Municipal Law Section 50-H. 15. More than thirty (30) days have elapsed since service of said Notice of Claim was filed and THE CITY OF NEW YORK has failed to pay or adjust the claims. 16. This action falls within one or more of the exceptions as set forth in CPLR Section 1602, involving intentional actions, as well as the defendant, and/or defendants, having acted in reckless disregard for the safety of others, as well as having performed intentional acts. 17. Plaintiff has sustained damages in an amount in excess of the jurisdictional limits of all the lower Courts of the State of New York. STATEMENT OF FACTS 18. On August 2, 2019, at approximately 3:00 p.m., Plaintiff was present in the vicinity of John F. Kennedy Airport, in Jamaica, New York, more specifically the Terminal 5 Access Road, when the defendant Peace Officers unlawfully assaulted and arrested Plaintiff without legal justification. 19. Plaintiff came to the airport that day to pick up a family member. 20. As Plaintiff was leaving the terminal, he was approached by a defendant Taxi and Limousine Commission (“TLC”) Peace Officer without warning or reason. 21. The TLC Peace Officer told Plaintiff to stop and tapped Plaintiff on the shoulder. 22. As Plaintiff turned around, he was punched hard in the face from his blindside. 23. Plaintiff lost consciousness and fell the ground. 24. Plaintiff regained consciousness as he was being handcuffed on the ground. 25. Plaintiff’s injuries from the arrest include physical trauma to his head, wrist, neck, legs and body. -5- FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 07/28/2023 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 726805/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/28/2023 26. Other TLC officers on the scene of Plaintiff’s arrest and involved in Plaintiff’s subsequent transport to an NYPD location did nothing to assist, provide Plaintiff with medical care, or otherwise intervene to prevent the continuing unlawful detention. 27. Plaintiff was taken to the 113 Precinct of the New York City Police Department where he was photographed, fingerprinted and placed in a holding cell. 28. While Plaintiff was at the 113 Precinct, none of the defendant Police Officers provided him with medical care or otherwise intervened to prevent his continuing unlawful detention. 29. After approximately 12 hours, Plaintiff was transported to Central Bookings. 30. On information and belief, during this time, defendant TLC Officers falsely communicated, or had communicated on their behalf, allegations that Plaintiff had committed a crime to Assistant District Attorneys at the Early Case Assessment Bureau for Queens County, to wit: Trespass and related offenses. 31. Defendant TLC Officer DeSantis signed a criminal complaint charging Plaintiff with the above-described charges, and attesting to manifestly false factual allegations, on August 2, 2019. 32. Plaintiff was arraigned and released before a Judge of the Criminal Court of Queens County after approximately 24 hours in custody. 33. The day after his release, Plaintiff went to the emergency room of Charlotte Hungerford Hospital in Connecticut where he received medical treatment for the injuries he sustained. 34. Plaintiff was also forced to hire a criminal defense attorney to fight these unlawful and manifestly false charges. 35. Plaintiff had to attend at least four court dates during the pendency of his case. 36. Despite the manifestly false allegations involved in this case, the Queens County District Attorney’s Office continued to maliciously and unlawfully prosecute the case for several months. 37. Plaintiff’s criminal case was dismissed and sealed on January 27, 2020. 38. At no time relevant herein did Plaintiff commit a crime or violate the law in any way, nor did the any defendant officers have an objective reason to accuse Plaintiff of committing a crime or violating the law in any way. -6- FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 07/28/2023 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 726805/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/28/2023 39. At no point did defendant officers recover any drugs, weapons, graffiti instruments, or other illegal contraband from Plaintiff or from a location that was in Plaintiff's possession, custody, or control. 40. Nevertheless, Plaintiff was unlawfully arrested and handcuffed by defendant officers without legal justification or probable cause, unlawfully fingerprinted, photographed and searched, and unlawfully detained. 41. Some of the police officer defendants observed the violation of Plaintiff’s rights under the Constitution of the United States and New York State Law and did nothing to prevent their fellow officers from unjustifiably assaulting, battering, and using excessive force against Plaintiff. 42. The unlawful assault, battery, and use of excessive force by the individually named defendants caused Plaintiff to sustain physical, psychological and emotional trauma. FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION Negligence 43. The Plaintiff repeats, reiterates and realleges each and every allegation contained in the foregoing paragraphs with the same force and effect as if more fully set forth at length herein. 44. Defendants owed a duty of care to Plaintiff. 45. To the extent defendants claim that the injuries to Plaintiff by the defendant police officers was unintentionally caused and that the force used by the defendants against him was unintentional, then the defendants breached that duty of care by knocking him unconscious and causing serious injury to his head, wrists, legs and body. 46. As a direct and proximate result of such acts, defendants deprived Plaintiff of his rights under the laws of the State of New York. 47. All of the foregoing occurred without any fault or provocation by Plaintiff. 48. Defendants were at all times agents, servants, and employees acting within the scope of their employment by the City of New York, the New York City Taxi and Limousine Commission, and the New York City Police Department, which are therefore responsible for their conduct. 49. The City, as the employer of the officer defendants, is responsible for their wrongdoing under the doctrine of respondeat superior. 50. As a result of the aforementioned conduct of defendants, Plaintiff sustained injuries, including but not limited to emotional and psychological injuries. -7- FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 07/28/2023 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 726805/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/28/2023 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION Unlawful Stop, Question, and Search 51. The Plaintiff repeats and realleges the foregoing paragraphs as if the same were fully set forth at length herein. 52. The illegal approach, pursuit, stop and grab employed by defendants herein terminated Plaintiff’s freedom of movement through means intentionally applied. 53. The conduct of defendants in approaching, stopping, and grabbing Plaintiff was performed under color of law and without any reasonable suspicion of criminality or other constitutionally required grounds. 54. As a direct and proximate result of such acts, defendants deprived Plaintiff of his rights under the laws of the State of New York. 55. Defendants were at all times agents, servants, and employees acting within the scope of their employment by the City of New York, the New York City Taxi and Limousine Commission, and the New York City Police Department, which are therefore responsible for their conduct. 56. The City, as the employer of the officer defendants, is responsible for their wrongdoing under the doctrine of respondeat superior. THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION Violation of Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment Rights: Unlawful Seizure and Deprivation of Liberty 57. The Plaintiff repeats and realleges the foregoing paragraphs as if the same were fully set forth at length herein. 58. The individually named police officer defendants, while acting in concert and within the scope of their authority, caused Plaintiff to be seized, unlawfully searched, falsely arrested, and falsely imprisoned, and maliciously prosecuted without reasonable suspicion and/or probable cause, in violation of Plaintiff’s right to be free of an unreasonable seizure under the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States and to be free of a deprivation of liberty under the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. 59. As a result of the aforementioned conduct of defendants, Plaintiff sustained injuries, including but not limited to physical, emotional and psychological injuries. FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION False Imprisonment -8- FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 07/28/2023 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 726805/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/28/2023 60. The Plaintiff repeats and realleges the foregoing paragraphs as if the same were fully set forth at length herein. 61. The acts and conduct of the defendants constitute false arrest and false imprisonment under the laws of the State of New York. Defendants intended to confine Plaintiff and, in fact, confined Plaintiff, and Plaintiff was conscious of the confinement. In addition, Plaintiff did not consent to the confinement and the confinement was not otherwise privileged. 62. As a direct and proximate result of such acts, defendants deprived Plaintiff of his rights under the laws of the State of New York and the United States Constitution. 63. Defendants were at all times agents, servants, and employees acting within the scope of their employment by the City of New York, the New York City Taxi and Limousine Commission, and the New York City Police Department, which are therefore responsible for their conduct. 64. The City, as the employer of the officer defendants, is responsible for their wrongdoing under the doctrine of respondeat superior. 65. As a result of the aforementioned conduct of defendants, Plaintiff sustained injuries, including but not limited to loss of liberty, emotional and psychological injuries. FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION Violation of Plaintiff’s Fourth And Fourteenth Amendment Rights: Excessive Force 66. The Plaintiff repeats, reiterates and realleges each and every allegation contained in the foregoing paragraphs with the same force and effect as if more fully set forth at length herein. 67. The use of excessive force by defendants by, amongst other things, punching Plaintiff in the face, knocking Plaintiff unconscious, and then roughly handcuffing, grabbing and throwing Plaintiff into a vehicle constituted objectively unreasonable physical seizures of Plaintiff in violation of his rights under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States and to be free of a deprivation of liberty under the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. 68. Defendants were at all times agents, servants, and employees acting within the scope of his employment by the City of New York, the New York City Taxi and Limousine Commission, and the New York City Police Department, which are therefore responsible for their conduct. SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION Assault -9- FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 07/28/2023 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 726805/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/28/2023 69. The Plaintiff repeats, reiterates and realleges each and every allegation contained in the foregoing paragraphs with the same force and effect as if more fully set forth at length herein. 70. Defendants, their agents, servants and employees, acting within the scope of their employment, intentionally, willfully and maliciously assaulted Plaintiff in that they had the real or apparent ability to cause imminent harmful and/or offensive bodily contact and intentionally did a violent and/or menacing act which threatened such contact to the Plaintiff, that such acts caused apprehension of such contact in the Plaintiff. 71. As a direct and proximate result of such acts, defendants deprived Plaintiff of his rights under the laws of the State of New York. 72. Defendants were at all times agents, servants, and employees acting within the scope of their employment by the City of New York, the New York City Taxi and Limousine Commission, and the New York City Police Department, which are therefore responsible for their conduct. 73. The City, as the employer of the officer defendants, is responsible for their wrongdoing under the doctrine of respondeat superior. 74. As a result of the aforementioned conduct of defendants, Plaintiff sustained injuries, including but not limited to emotional and psychological injuries. SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION Battery 75. The Plaintiff repeats, reiterates and realleges each and every allegation contained in the foregoing paragraphs with the same force and effect as if more fully set forth at length herein. 76. Defendants, their agents, servants and employees, acting within the scope of their employment, intentionally, willfully and maliciously battered Plaintiff, when they, in a hostile and/or offensive manner tased Plaintiff, roughly handcuffing, grabbing and throwing Plaintiff into a vehicle and slamming Plaintiff’s foot against the vehicle brutally effecting an arrest of Plaintiff without his consent and with the intention of causing harmful and/or offensive bodily contact to the Plaintiff and caused such battery. 77. As a direct and proximate result of such acts, defendants deprived Plaintiff of his rights under the laws of the State of New York. 78. Defendants were at all times agents, servants, and employees acting within the scope of their employment by the City of New York, the New York City Taxi and Limousine Commission, and the New York City Police Department, which are therefore responsible for their conduct. - 10 - FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 07/28/2023 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 726805/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/28/2023 79. The City, as the employer of the officer defendants, is responsible for their wrongdoing under the doctrine of respondeat superior. 80. As a result of the aforementioned conduct of defendants, Plaintiff sustained injuries, including but not limited to emotional and psychological injuries. EIGTH CAUSE OF ACTION Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress 81. The Plaintiff repeats, reiterates and realleges each and every allegation contained in the foregoing paragraphs with the same force and effect as if more fully set forth at length herein. 82. By the actions described herein, defendants, each acting individually and in concert with each other, engaged in extreme and outrageous conduct, conduct utterly intolerable in a civilized community, which negligently caused severe emotional distress to Plaintiff. The acts and conduct of the defendants were the direct and proximate cause of injury and damage to Plaintiff and violated Plaintiff’s statutory and common law rights as guaranteed by the laws and Constitution of the State of New York. 83. The acts and conduct of the defendants were the direct and proximate cause of injury and damage to Plaintiff and violated Plaintiff’s statutory and common law rights as guaranteed Plaintiff by the laws and Constitution of the State of New York. 84. As a direct and proximate result of such acts, defendants deprived Plaintiff of his rights under the laws of the State of New York. 85. Defendants were at all times agents, servants, and employees acting within the scope of their employment by the City of New York, the New York City Taxi and Limousine Commission, and the New York City Police Department, which are therefore responsible for their conduct. 86. The City, as the employer of the officer defendants, is responsible for their wrongdoing under the doctrine of respondeat superior. 87. As a result of the aforementioned conduct of defendants, Plaintiff sustained injuries, including but not limited to emotional and psychological injuries. NINTH CAUSE OF ACTION Negligent Hiring, Retention, Training and Supervision 88. The Plaintiff repeats, reiterates and realleges each and every allegation contained in the foregoing paragraphs with the same force and effect as if more fully set forth at length herein. - 11 - FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 07/28/2023 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 726805/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/28/2023 89. The City of New York and its employees, servants and/or agents acting within the scope of their employment did negligently hire, retain, train and supervise defendants, individuals who were unfit for the performance of police duties on the aforementioned dates at the aforementioned locations. 90. As a result of the aforementioned conduct of defendants, Plaintiff sustained injuries, including but not limited to physical, emotional and psychological injuries. TENTH CAUSE OF ACTION Failure to Intervene 91. The Plaintiff repeats, reiterates and realleges each and every allegation contained in the foregoing paragraphs with the same force and effect as if more fully set forth at length herein. 92. The defendants that did not physically touch Plaintiff, but were present when other officers violated Plaintiff’s Constitutional Rights had an affirmative duty to intervene on behalf of Plaintiff, whose constitutional rights were being violated in their presence by other officers. 93. Defendants failed to intervene to prevent the unlawful conduct described herein. 94. As a result of the foregoing, Plaintiff’s suffered serious, debilitating and permanent injury, his liberty was restricted for an extended period of time, he was put in fear of his safety, his injuries worsened, he did not receive necessary medical treatment, and he was humiliated and subject to other physical constraints. 95. As a direct and proximate result of such acts, defendants deprived Plaintiff of his rights under the laws of the State of New York. 96. Defendants were at all times agents, servants, and employees acting within the scope of their employment by the City of New York, the New York City Taxi and Limousine Commission, and the New York City Police Department, which are therefore responsible for their conduct. 97. The City, as the employer of the officer defendants, is responsible for their wrongdoing under the doctrine of respondeat superior. 98. As a result of the aforementioned conduct of defendants, Plaintiff sustained injuries, including but not limited to emotional and psychological injuries. ELEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION Violation of Fourth And Fourteenth Amendment Rights: Denial of Right to Fair Trial/Due Process - 12 - FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 07/28/2023 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 726805/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/28/2023 99. The Plaintiff repeats and realleges the foregoing paragraphs as if the same were fully set forth at length herein. 100. Defendants, individually and collectively, manufactured and/or withheld false evidence and forwarded this false evidence to prosecutors in the Queens County District Attorney’s Office. 101. Defendants filled out false and misleading police reports and forwarded them to prosecutors in the Queens County District Attorney’s Office. 102. Defendants signed false and misleading criminal court affidavits and forwarded them to prosecutors in the Queens County District Attorney’s Office. 103. In withholding/creating false evidence against Plaintiff, and in providing/withholding information with respect thereto, Defendants violated Plaintiff’s constitutional right to due process and fair trial under the New York State Constitution and under the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States and to be free to deprivation of liberty under the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. 104. As a result of the foregoing, Plaintiff sustained, inter alia, loss of the right to due process and a fair trial, loss of liberty, emotional distress, embarrassment and humiliation, and deprivation of his constitutional rights. 105. Defendants were at all times agents, servants, and employees acting within the scope of their employment by the City of New York, the New York City Taxi and Limousine Commission, and the New York City Police Department, which are therefore responsible for their conduct. 106. The City, as the employer of the officer Defendants, is responsible for their wrongdoing under the doctrine of respondeat superior. 107. As a result of the aforementioned conduct of Defendants, Plaintiff sustained injuries including, but not limited to: economic, emotional and psychological injuries. TWELFTH CAUSE OF ACTION Deliberate Indifference to Medical Needs 65. The Plaintiff repeats and realleges the foregoing paragraphs as if the same were fully set forth at length herein. 66. Defendants despite being aware that Plaintiff, a man in his late 50’s had been punched in the face and knocked unconscious thereby requiring medication and additional treatment from medical professionals, delayed Plaintiff’s medical treatment and refused to administer and properly procure immediate and adequate medical attention. - 13 - FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 07/28/2023 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 726805/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/28/2023 67. The delay in medical treatment to Plaintiff’s injuries resulted in hospitalization, increased severity in Plaintiff’s injuries that were suffered by Plaintiff that would have been prevented if Plaintiff received treatment in a timely manner. 68. As a direct and proximate result of such acts, defendants deprived Plaintiff of his rights under the laws of the State of New York. 69. Defendants were at all times agents, servants, and employees acting within the scope of their employment by the City of New York, the New York City Taxi and Limousine Commission, and the New York City Police Department, which are therefore responsible for their conduct. 70. The City, as the employer of the officer defendants, is responsible for their wrongdoing under the doctrine of respondeat superior. 71. As a result of the aforementioned conduct of defendants, Plaintiff sustained injuries, including but not limited to emotional and psychological injuries. THIRTEENTH CAUSE OF ACTION Malicious Prosecution 108. The Plaintiff repeats and realleges the foregoing paragraphs as if the same were fully set forth at length herein. 109. The acts and conduct of the Defendants constitute malicious prosecution under the United States Constitution. 110. Defendants commenced and continued a criminal proceeding against Plaintiff. 111. There was actual malice and an absence of probable cause for the criminal proceeding against Plaintiff and for each of the charges for which they were prosecuted. 112. The prosecution and criminal proceedings terminated in Plaintiff’s favor on the aforementioned dates. JURY DEMAND 113. Plaintiff hereby demands trial by jury of all issues properly triable thereby. PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Plaintiff JOSE SANDOVAL demands judgment against the defendants on each cause of action in amounts to be determined upon the trial of this action which exceeds the jurisdiction of lower courts, inclusive of punitive damages and attorneys’ fees inclusive of costs and disbursements of this action, interest and such other relief as is appropriate - 14 - FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 07/28/2023 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 726805/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/28/2023 under the law. That the Plaintiff recover the cost of the suit herein, including reasonable attorney’s fees pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1988. Dated: New York, New York December 3, 2021 By: Cary London, Esq. Shulman-Hill, PLLC Attorneys for Plaintiff 1 State Street Plaza 15th Floor New York, New York 10004 (212) 203-1090 TO: THE CITY OF NEW YORK, Corporation Counsel, 100 Church Street, NY, NY 10007 NEW YORK TAXI AND LIMOUSINE COMMISION, TLC Legal Affairs, 33 Beaver Street, 22nd Floor TLC PEACE OFFICER JOHN DESANTIS, TLC Legal Affairs, 33 Beaver Street, 22nd Floor - 15 - FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 07/28/2023 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 726805/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/28/2023 ATTORNEY'S VERIFICATION CARY LONDON, an attorney duly admitted to practice before the Courts of the State of New York, affirms the following to be true under the penalties of perjury: I am a partner of the law firm of SHULMAN-HILL PLLC, I have read the annexed VERIFIED COMPLAINT and know the contents thereof, and the same are true to my knowledge, except those matters therein which are stated to be alleged upon information and belief, and as to those matters I believe them to be true. My belief, as to those matters therein not stated upon knowledge, is based upon facts, records, and other pertinent information contained in my files. The reason this verification is made by me and not Plaintiff is because Plaintiff does not reside in the county wherein I maintain my office. DATED: New York, New York December 3, 2021 ______________________________ CARY LONDON - 16 - FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 07/28/2023 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 726805/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/28/2023 April 6, 2022 VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL TO ECF Hon. Sylvia O. Hinds-Radix Corporation Counsel New York City Law Department 100 Church Street New York, New York 10007 RE: Jose Sandoval v. The City of New York, et al. Index No.: 726805/2021 Law Dept. File No.: 2021-042566 Your Honor: I am an attorney who represents JOSE SANDOVAL in the above-referenced case. In that regard, enclosed please find: (1) Plaintiff’s Verified Bill of Particulars; (2) Plaintiff’s Response to Defendant’s Demand for Discovery and Inspection; (3) Plaintiff’s Notice for Discovery and Inspection; (4) Notice for Depositions; (5) an original 160.50 authorization executed by Plaintiff, and (6) HIPAA-compliant authorizations executed by Plaintiff for Charlotte Hungerford Hospital. The following documents are included in plaintiff’s document production annexed hereto, bates numbered P1 through P39: Criminal Court Documents P1-P7 Certificate of Disposition P8 Medical Records P9-P29 Photographs of Injuries P30-P38 50H Hearing Notice P39 1 FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 07/28/2023 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 726805/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/28/2023 Thank you for your kind attention to this matter. Should you have any question or require additional information, please feel free to contact me. Very yours truly, /s C. Cass Luskin, Esq. Enclosures 2 FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 07/28/2023 03:04 PM INDEX NO. 726805/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/28/2023 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF QUEENS ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ JOSE SANDOVAL, VERIFIED BILL OF Plaintiff, PARTICULARS -against- Index No.: 726805/2021 THE CITY OF NEW YORK., THE NEW YORK TAXI AND LIMOUSINE COMMISSION, PEACE OFFICER JOHN DESANTIS, TAX REG. 350759, NEW YORK TAXICAB AND LIMOUSINE COMMISSION JOHN DOES NUMBERS ONE THROUGH TEN, Defendants. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Plaintiff JOSE SANDOVAL, by and through his attorneys, SHULMAN AND HILL, PLLC, as and for his Verified Bill of Particulars, hereby sets forth and alleges, upon information and belief, as follows: 1. See Notice of Claim, dated October 25, 2019, and Verified Complaint, filed on December 3, 2021. Plaintiff was unlawfully arrested on August 2, 2019, at approximately 3:00 p.m., on or in the vicinity of John F. Kennedy Airport, Jamaica, New York. 2. See Response to No. 1, above. 3. See Notice of Claim, dated October 25, 2019, and Verified Complaint, filed on Dece