Preview
FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2021 03:09 PM INDEX NO. 514169/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2021
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF KINGS
Filed:
MARIA IDROVO, Index No.:
Plaintiff, Plaintiff designates KINGS
. County as the place of trial.
-against-
S U M M O N S
THE CITY OF NEW YORK, NEW YORK CITY POLICE
DEPARTMENT and NEW YORK CITY POLICE OFFICERS . .
DOES" he basis of venue is
"JOHN 1-100 (as employees, agents, servants of the NEW
Plaintiffs residence:
YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT),
316 McGuiness Blvd
Apt 2R
Defendants.
Brooklyn, NY 11222
To the above named Defendants:
YOU ARE HEREBY SUMMONED to answer the complaint in ther action and to serve a
copy of your answer on the plaintiffs attorneys within 20 days after the service of ther summons,
exclusive of the day of service of ther summons, or within 30 days after service of ther summons is
complete if ther summons is not personally delivered to you within the State of New York.
In case of your failure to answer ther summons, a judgment by default will be taken against
you for the relief demanded in the complaint, together with the costs of ther action.
Dated: Astoria, New York
June 8, 2021
By Kur . Doiron, Esq.
SACCO & FILLAS, LLP
Attomeys for Plaintiff(s)
31-19 Newtown Avenue
Seventh Floor
Astoria, New York 11102
(718) 746-3440
Our File # 24800-20
SACCO& FILLAS,LLP
1 of 15
FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2021 03:09 PM INDEX NO. 514169/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2021
DEFENDANTS:
THE CITY OF NEW YORK
Comptroller's Office of THE CITY OF NEW YORK
Manhattan Municipal Building
1 Centre Street
New York, NY 10007
NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT
One Police Plaza
New York, NY 10007
FORWARD THER IMMEDIATELY TO YOUR ATTORNEY OR INSURANCE COMPANY
2 of 15
FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2021 03:09 PM INDEX NO. 514169/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2021
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF KINGS
MARIA IDROVO,
Index No.:
Plaintiff,
VERIFIED COMPLAINT
-against-
THE CITY OF NEW YORK, NEW YORK CITY POLICE
DEPARTMENT and NEW YORK CITY POLICE OFFICERS
DOES"
"JOHN 1-100 (as employees, agents, servants of the NEW
YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT),
Defendants.
Plaintiff, by her attorneys, SACCO & FILLAS, LLP, as and for her Verified Complaint
respectfully alleges, upon informatioñ and belief:
1. The plaintiff, MARIA IDROVO, at all times herein mentioned was and still is a
resident of the County of Queens and the State of New York.
2. At all times herein mentioned, defendant THE CITY OF NEW YORK, was and still is
a municipal corporation, created, organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State
of New York.
3. At all times herein mentioned, defendant NEW YORK CITY POLICE
DEPARTMENT, was and still is a municipal corporation, created, organized and existing under anÔ
by virtue of the laws of the State of New York.
NOTICE OF CLAIM
4. Prior to the com-er cemeñt of the action, a notice of claim in was served ori
writing
behalf of MARIA IDROVO, upon THE CITY OF NEW YORK in accordance with Section 50-e of
the General Municipal Law.
SACCO&FILLAS,LLP
3 of 15
FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2021 03:09 PM INDEX NO. 514169/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2021
5. Within ninety days (90) of the ocuunence herein, a notice of claim in writing wa
served on behalf of Maria upon THE CITY OF NEW YORK in accordance with Section 50-
Idrovo,
of the General Municipal Law.
6. Within ninety days (90) of September 29, 2020, a notice of claim in writing was serve
on behalf of Maria Idrovo, upon THE CITY OF NEW YORK in accordance with Section 50-e of th
General Municipal Law.
7. Prior to the commencement of the action, notice of the intention of MARIA IDROVO
to comm-e an action, unless the claim presented was adjusted within the prescribed time as set fortl1
by applicable law to adjust such claims, was served on behalf of MARIA IDROVO upon THE CITY
OF NEW YORK.
8. Although more than thirty (30) days have elapsed since service of such notice of claim
THE CITY OF NEW YORK neglected and has refused to pay said claim or adjust same.
9. A hearing pursuant to General Municipal Law 50-h has been held on April 1, 2021.
10. Ther action is commenced within one (1) year and ninety (90) days, the date of the
, disposition of wrongful arrest as herein set forth occurred.
AS AND FOR A FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION FOR MALICIOUS PROSECUTION
11. On or about September 29, 2020, the plaintiff MARIA IDROVO was wrongfully
arrested.
12. At all times herein mentioned, MARIA IDROVO, was maliciously and without
probable reason or cause, inculpated in criminal actions in which she did not participate, by THE CITY
OF NEW YORK, NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT and NEW YORK CITY POLICE
SACCO& FILLAS,LLP
4 of 15
FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2021 03:09 PM INDEX NO. 514169/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2021
DOES"
OFFICERS "JOHN 1-100 (as employees, agents, servants of the NEW YORK CITY POLICE
DEPARTMENT).
13. At all times herein mentioned, the defendants THE CITY OF NEW YORK, NEW
DOES"
YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT and NEW YORK CITY POLICE OFFICERS "JOHN
1-100 (as employees, agents, servants of the NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT)
maliciously instituted judicial proceedings without probable cause for doing so, which forced MARIA
IDROVO to expend money and retain an attorney for the scheduled Court hearings.
14. The cause of action for malicious prosecution arose on September 30, 2020, with the
dismissal of the criminal action against MARIA IDROVO in the of Kings County, City and
County
State of New York.
15. The charges were lodged against the plaintiff without probable cause or justification
and were designed to harass and intimidate the plaintiff, to cause the plaintiff to expend great sums of
money for her defense, to embarrass the plaintiff in the community, and among her friends and
relatives, employer, and co-employees, and to subject plaintiff to a possible term of imprisonment.
16. By reason of the malicious prosecution, MARIA IDROVO was deprived of her liberty
and was subjected to scorn and ridicule. Petitioner suffered pain and distress of mind and body.
Petitioner suffered shock and embarrassment. Petitioner was arrested, detained, and was required to
spend large sums of money to defend herself against the prosecution in the Criminal Court of THE
CITY OF NEW YORK, NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT and NEW YORK CITY
DOES"
POLICE OFFICERS "JOHN 1-100 (as employees, agents, servants of the NEW YORK CITY
POLICE DEPARTMENT) and in the proceeding before the State. Petitioner suffered losses from her
business and was degraded in the esteem of the community.
SACCO& FILLAS,LLP
5 of 15
FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2021 03:09 PM INDEX NO. 514169/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2021
17. The defendant's conduct constituted malicious prosecution on the part of the defendant
against the plaintiff, and her malicious prosecution has caused the plaintifTto undergo extreme mental
pain and anguish, humiliation, and damage to her reputation.
18. This malicious prosecution was encouraged, aided, abetted, and incited voluntarily and
willfully by the defendants THE CITY OF NEW YORK, NEW YORK CITY POLICE
DOES"
DEPARTMENT and NEW YORK CITY POLICE OFFICERS "JOHN 1-100 (as employees,
agents, servants of the NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT).
19. At all times herein mentioned, MARIA IDROVO, was maliciously and without
probable reason or cause, inculpated in criminal actions in which he did not participate, by THE CITY
OF NEW YORK, NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT and NEW YORK CITY POLICE
DOES"
OFFICERS "JOHN 1-100 (as employees, agents, servants ofthe NEW YORK CITY POLICE
DEPARTMENT).
20. At all times herein mentioned, the defendant THE CITY OF NEW YORK, NEW
DOES"
YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT and NEW YORK CITY POLICE OFFICERS "JOHN
1-100 (as employees, agents, servants of the NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT),
maliciously instituted judicial proceedings without probable cause for doing so, which forced MARIA
IDROVO to expend money and retain an attorney for the scheduled Court hearings.
21. The proceeding was prosecuted with actual malice against the plaintiff, Maria Idrovo.
22. Ther action falls within one or more of the exceptions set forth in Section 1602 of
the Civil Practice Law and Rules.
23. The plaintiff, because of the foregoing reckless and malicious actions, is entitled
to exemplary or punitive damages against the defendants, THE CITY OF NEW YORK, NEW YORK
DOES"
CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT and NEW YORK CITY POLICE OFFICERS "JOHN 1-10C
SACCO& RLLAS, LLP
6 of 15
FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2021 03:09 PM INDEX NO. 514169/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2021
(as employees, agents, servants of the NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT) in a sum which
exceeds the jurisdictional limit of all lower Courts which would otherwise have jurisdiction.
AS AND FOR A SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION FOR ABUSE OF PROCESS
24. Plaintiff repeats and realleges each and every allegation contaiñêd in the above
paragraphs of the Complaint as if fully set forth at length herein.
25. The defendants herein, THE CITY OF NEW YORK, NEW YORK CITY POLICE
DOES"
DEPARTMENT and NEW YORK CITY POLICE OFFICERS "JOHN 1-100 (as employees
agents, servants of the NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT) wrongfully and maliciously
and with intent to injure plaintiff, prosecuted a criminal action against the Plaintiff.
26. By reason of the foregoing abuse of process plaintiff was deprived of her liberty
suffered pain and distress of mind and body and sustained significant emotional pain and suffering
and was compelled to employ an attorney.
27. The above acts constituted reckless, wanton misconduct and were willfully and
directed against the plaintiff
maliciously
28. The plaintiff, because of the foregoing reckless and malicious actions, is entitled to
exemplary or punitive damages against the defendants, THE CITY OF NEW YORK, NEW YORK
DOES"
CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT and NEW YORK CITY POLICE OFFICERS "JOHN 1-10C
(as employees, agents, servants of the NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT) in a sum which
exceeds the jurisdictional limit of all lower Courts which would otherwise have jurisdiction.
SACCO&RLLAS,LLP
7 of 15
FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2021 03:09 PM INDEX NO. 514169/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2021
AS AND FOR A THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION FOR WRONGFUL ARREST
29. Plaintiff repeats and realleges each and every allegation contained in the above
paragraphs of the Complaint as if fully set forth at length herein.
30. Specifically, on September 29, 2020, MARIA IDROVO was wrongfully arrested under
number K20629965.
31. The charges were lodged agaiñst the plaintiff without probable cause or justification
and were designed to harass and intimidate the plaintiff, to cause the plaintiff to expeñd great sums of
money for his defense, to embarrass the plaintiff in the community, and among his friends and
relatives, employer, and co-employees, and to subject plaintiff to a possible term of imprisonment.
32. The
defendants'
conduct constituted maha prosecution on the part of the defendant
against the plaintiff, and his malicious prosecution has caused the plaintiff to undergo extreme mental
pain and anguish, humiliation, and damage to her reputation.
33. At all times herein mentioned, MARIA IDROVO, was maliciously and without
probable reason or cause, inculpated in criminal actions in which he did not participate, by THE CITY
OF NEW YORK, NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT and NEW YORK CITY POLICE
DOES"
OFFICERS "JOHN 1-100 (as employees, agents, servants of the NEW YORK CITY POLICE
DEPARTMENT).
34. The proceeding was prosecuted with actual malice against the plaintiff, MARIA
IDROVO.
35. By reason for the wrong arrest, MARIA IDROVO, was deprived of her liberty and was
subjected to scorn and ridicule. Plaintiff suffered pain and distress of mind and body and sustained
significant emotional pain and suffering. Plaintiff suffered shock and embarrasement, Plaintiff was
arrested, detained, fingerprinted, photographed, and was required to large sums of money to defend
SACCO& NLLAS, LLP 8 of 15
FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2021 03:09 PM INDEX NO. 514169/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2021
herself against the prosecution in the Criminal Court of Kings and in the before
County, proceeding
the State. Plaintiff suffered loss and was degraded in the esteem of the cc--üñity.
36. This action falls within one year or more of the exceptions set forth in Section 1602 of
the Civil Practice Law and Rules.
defendants'
37. The conduct was willful, wanton, reckless, malicious and/or eylibited a
gross indifference to, and a callous disregard for human life, and the rights of others, and mor
safety
particularly, the rights, life and safety of MARIA IDROVO as a result of the defendant's malicion
prosecution.
38. The above acts constituted reckless, wañton miscoñduct and were willfully and
maliciously directed against the plaintiff.
39. The plaintiff, because of the foregoing reckless and malicious actions, is entitled tc
excmplary or punitive damages against the defendants, THE CITY OF NEW YORK, NEW YORK
DOES"
CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT and NEW YORK CITY POLICE OFFICERS "JOHN 1-100
(as employees, agents, servants of the NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT) in a sum which
exceeds the jurisdictional limit of all lower Courts which would otherwise have jurisdiction.
AS AND FOR A FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
40. Plaintiff repeats and realleges each and every allegation contained in the above
paragraphs of the Complaint as if fully set forth at length herein.
41. That the aforesaid conduct on the part of the defendants, THE CITY OF NEW YORK
NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT and NEW YORK CITY POLICE OFFICERS "JOHN
DOES"
1-100 (as employees, agents, servants of the NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT)
constituted a violation of the plaintiff, MARIA IDROVO's civil rights under 42 USC 1983 in that the
SACCO&FILLAS, LLP
9 of 15
FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2021 03:09 PM INDEX NO. 514169/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2021
plaintiff was deprived of her rights, privileges and immüñities secured to her the Constitution and
by
laws of the U.S.A. and the New York State Constitution by one who under color of a statute or
regulation of a state, caused the plaintiff to be so deprived.
42. That the aforesaid use of excessive force on the plaintiff by the defeñdants, and the
subsequent false arrest and imprison-ment of the plaintiff by the defeñdañts, deprived the plaintiff of
the constitutional right to bodily security and liberty under the Fourteenth Amendment to the United
States Constitution, and was an unreasonable physical seizure of the plaintiff under the Fourth
Amendment to the United States Constitution.
43. That as a result of the aforesaid occurrence, the plaintiff, MARIA IDROVO, was
esüsed to and did sustain severe, serious and protracted injuries to her person and body.
defendants'
44. Due to negligence, plaintiff is entitled to damages in a sum which execeds
the jurisdictional limit of all lower Courts which would otherwise have jurisdiction.
45. That said incident and resulting injuries to the plaintifE MARIA IDROVO, were caused
solely as a result of the unintentional consequence of an intêñtional act on the part of the arresting
officer, without any culpable conduct on the part of the plaintiff, MARIA IDROVO contributing
thereto.
46. That as a result of the foregoing, plaintiff is entitled to damages in the sum which
exceeds the jurisdictional limit of all lower Courts which would otherwise have jurisdiction.
AS AND FOR A FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION ON BEHALF OF PLAINTIFF AGAINST THE
DEFENDANTS FOR
Preview
FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2021 03:09 PM INDEX NO. 514169/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2021 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF KINGS Filed: MARIA IDROVO, Index No.: Plaintiff, Plaintiff designates KINGS . County as the place of trial. -against- S U M M O N S THE CITY OF NEW YORK, NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT and NEW YORK CITY POLICE OFFICERS . . DOES" he basis of venue is "JOHN 1-100 (as employees, agents, servants of the NEW Plaintiffs residence: YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT), 316 McGuiness Blvd Apt 2R Defendants. Brooklyn, NY 11222 To the above named Defendants: YOU ARE HEREBY SUMMONED to answer the complaint in ther action and to serve a copy of your answer on the plaintiffs attorneys within 20 days after the service of ther summons, exclusive of the day of service of ther summons, or within 30 days after service of ther summons is complete if ther summons is not personally delivered to you within the State of New York. In case of your failure to answer ther summons, a judgment by default will be taken against you for the relief demanded in the complaint, together with the costs of ther action. Dated: Astoria, New York June 8, 2021 By Kur . Doiron, Esq. SACCO & FILLAS, LLP Attomeys for Plaintiff(s) 31-19 Newtown Avenue Seventh Floor Astoria, New York 11102 (718) 746-3440 Our File # 24800-20 SACCO& FILLAS,LLP 1 of 15 FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2021 03:09 PM INDEX NO. 514169/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2021 DEFENDANTS: THE CITY OF NEW YORK Comptroller's Office of THE CITY OF NEW YORK Manhattan Municipal Building 1 Centre Street New York, NY 10007 NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT One Police Plaza New York, NY 10007 FORWARD THER IMMEDIATELY TO YOUR ATTORNEY OR INSURANCE COMPANY 2 of 15 FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2021 03:09 PM INDEX NO. 514169/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2021 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF KINGS MARIA IDROVO, Index No.: Plaintiff, VERIFIED COMPLAINT -against- THE CITY OF NEW YORK, NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT and NEW YORK CITY POLICE OFFICERS DOES" "JOHN 1-100 (as employees, agents, servants of the NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT), Defendants. Plaintiff, by her attorneys, SACCO & FILLAS, LLP, as and for her Verified Complaint respectfully alleges, upon informatioñ and belief: 1. The plaintiff, MARIA IDROVO, at all times herein mentioned was and still is a resident of the County of Queens and the State of New York. 2. At all times herein mentioned, defendant THE CITY OF NEW YORK, was and still is a municipal corporation, created, organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York. 3. At all times herein mentioned, defendant NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT, was and still is a municipal corporation, created, organized and existing under anÔ by virtue of the laws of the State of New York. NOTICE OF CLAIM 4. Prior to the com-er cemeñt of the action, a notice of claim in was served ori writing behalf of MARIA IDROVO, upon THE CITY OF NEW YORK in accordance with Section 50-e of the General Municipal Law. SACCO&FILLAS,LLP 3 of 15 FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2021 03:09 PM INDEX NO. 514169/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2021 5. Within ninety days (90) of the ocuunence herein, a notice of claim in writing wa served on behalf of Maria upon THE CITY OF NEW YORK in accordance with Section 50- Idrovo, of the General Municipal Law. 6. Within ninety days (90) of September 29, 2020, a notice of claim in writing was serve on behalf of Maria Idrovo, upon THE CITY OF NEW YORK in accordance with Section 50-e of th General Municipal Law. 7. Prior to the commencement of the action, notice of the intention of MARIA IDROVO to comm-e an action, unless the claim presented was adjusted within the prescribed time as set fortl1 by applicable law to adjust such claims, was served on behalf of MARIA IDROVO upon THE CITY OF NEW YORK. 8. Although more than thirty (30) days have elapsed since service of such notice of claim THE CITY OF NEW YORK neglected and has refused to pay said claim or adjust same. 9. A hearing pursuant to General Municipal Law 50-h has been held on April 1, 2021. 10. Ther action is commenced within one (1) year and ninety (90) days, the date of the , disposition of wrongful arrest as herein set forth occurred. AS AND FOR A FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION FOR MALICIOUS PROSECUTION 11. On or about September 29, 2020, the plaintiff MARIA IDROVO was wrongfully arrested. 12. At all times herein mentioned, MARIA IDROVO, was maliciously and without probable reason or cause, inculpated in criminal actions in which she did not participate, by THE CITY OF NEW YORK, NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT and NEW YORK CITY POLICE SACCO& FILLAS,LLP 4 of 15 FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2021 03:09 PM INDEX NO. 514169/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2021 DOES" OFFICERS "JOHN 1-100 (as employees, agents, servants of the NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT). 13. At all times herein mentioned, the defendants THE CITY OF NEW YORK, NEW DOES" YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT and NEW YORK CITY POLICE OFFICERS "JOHN 1-100 (as employees, agents, servants of the NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT) maliciously instituted judicial proceedings without probable cause for doing so, which forced MARIA IDROVO to expend money and retain an attorney for the scheduled Court hearings. 14. The cause of action for malicious prosecution arose on September 30, 2020, with the dismissal of the criminal action against MARIA IDROVO in the of Kings County, City and County State of New York. 15. The charges were lodged against the plaintiff without probable cause or justification and were designed to harass and intimidate the plaintiff, to cause the plaintiff to expend great sums of money for her defense, to embarrass the plaintiff in the community, and among her friends and relatives, employer, and co-employees, and to subject plaintiff to a possible term of imprisonment. 16. By reason of the malicious prosecution, MARIA IDROVO was deprived of her liberty and was subjected to scorn and ridicule. Petitioner suffered pain and distress of mind and body. Petitioner suffered shock and embarrassment. Petitioner was arrested, detained, and was required to spend large sums of money to defend herself against the prosecution in the Criminal Court of THE CITY OF NEW YORK, NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT and NEW YORK CITY DOES" POLICE OFFICERS "JOHN 1-100 (as employees, agents, servants of the NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT) and in the proceeding before the State. Petitioner suffered losses from her business and was degraded in the esteem of the community. SACCO& FILLAS,LLP 5 of 15 FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2021 03:09 PM INDEX NO. 514169/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2021 17. The defendant's conduct constituted malicious prosecution on the part of the defendant against the plaintiff, and her malicious prosecution has caused the plaintifTto undergo extreme mental pain and anguish, humiliation, and damage to her reputation. 18. This malicious prosecution was encouraged, aided, abetted, and incited voluntarily and willfully by the defendants THE CITY OF NEW YORK, NEW YORK CITY POLICE DOES" DEPARTMENT and NEW YORK CITY POLICE OFFICERS "JOHN 1-100 (as employees, agents, servants of the NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT). 19. At all times herein mentioned, MARIA IDROVO, was maliciously and without probable reason or cause, inculpated in criminal actions in which he did not participate, by THE CITY OF NEW YORK, NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT and NEW YORK CITY POLICE DOES" OFFICERS "JOHN 1-100 (as employees, agents, servants ofthe NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT). 20. At all times herein mentioned, the defendant THE CITY OF NEW YORK, NEW DOES" YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT and NEW YORK CITY POLICE OFFICERS "JOHN 1-100 (as employees, agents, servants of the NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT), maliciously instituted judicial proceedings without probable cause for doing so, which forced MARIA IDROVO to expend money and retain an attorney for the scheduled Court hearings. 21. The proceeding was prosecuted with actual malice against the plaintiff, Maria Idrovo. 22. Ther action falls within one or more of the exceptions set forth in Section 1602 of the Civil Practice Law and Rules. 23. The plaintiff, because of the foregoing reckless and malicious actions, is entitled to exemplary or punitive damages against the defendants, THE CITY OF NEW YORK, NEW YORK DOES" CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT and NEW YORK CITY POLICE OFFICERS "JOHN 1-10C SACCO& RLLAS, LLP 6 of 15 FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2021 03:09 PM INDEX NO. 514169/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2021 (as employees, agents, servants of the NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT) in a sum which exceeds the jurisdictional limit of all lower Courts which would otherwise have jurisdiction. AS AND FOR A SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION FOR ABUSE OF PROCESS 24. Plaintiff repeats and realleges each and every allegation contaiñêd in the above paragraphs of the Complaint as if fully set forth at length herein. 25. The defendants herein, THE CITY OF NEW YORK, NEW YORK CITY POLICE DOES" DEPARTMENT and NEW YORK CITY POLICE OFFICERS "JOHN 1-100 (as employees agents, servants of the NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT) wrongfully and maliciously and with intent to injure plaintiff, prosecuted a criminal action against the Plaintiff. 26. By reason of the foregoing abuse of process plaintiff was deprived of her liberty suffered pain and distress of mind and body and sustained significant emotional pain and suffering and was compelled to employ an attorney. 27. The above acts constituted reckless, wanton misconduct and were willfully and directed against the plaintiff maliciously 28. The plaintiff, because of the foregoing reckless and malicious actions, is entitled to exemplary or punitive damages against the defendants, THE CITY OF NEW YORK, NEW YORK DOES" CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT and NEW YORK CITY POLICE OFFICERS "JOHN 1-10C (as employees, agents, servants of the NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT) in a sum which exceeds the jurisdictional limit of all lower Courts which would otherwise have jurisdiction. SACCO&RLLAS,LLP 7 of 15 FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2021 03:09 PM INDEX NO. 514169/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2021 AS AND FOR A THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION FOR WRONGFUL ARREST 29. Plaintiff repeats and realleges each and every allegation contained in the above paragraphs of the Complaint as if fully set forth at length herein. 30. Specifically, on September 29, 2020, MARIA IDROVO was wrongfully arrested under number K20629965. 31. The charges were lodged agaiñst the plaintiff without probable cause or justification and were designed to harass and intimidate the plaintiff, to cause the plaintiff to expeñd great sums of money for his defense, to embarrass the plaintiff in the community, and among his friends and relatives, employer, and co-employees, and to subject plaintiff to a possible term of imprisonment. 32. The defendants' conduct constituted maha prosecution on the part of the defendant against the plaintiff, and his malicious prosecution has caused the plaintiff to undergo extreme mental pain and anguish, humiliation, and damage to her reputation. 33. At all times herein mentioned, MARIA IDROVO, was maliciously and without probable reason or cause, inculpated in criminal actions in which he did not participate, by THE CITY OF NEW YORK, NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT and NEW YORK CITY POLICE DOES" OFFICERS "JOHN 1-100 (as employees, agents, servants of the NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT). 34. The proceeding was prosecuted with actual malice against the plaintiff, MARIA IDROVO. 35. By reason for the wrong arrest, MARIA IDROVO, was deprived of her liberty and was subjected to scorn and ridicule. Plaintiff suffered pain and distress of mind and body and sustained significant emotional pain and suffering. Plaintiff suffered shock and embarrasement, Plaintiff was arrested, detained, fingerprinted, photographed, and was required to large sums of money to defend SACCO& NLLAS, LLP 8 of 15 FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2021 03:09 PM INDEX NO. 514169/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2021 herself against the prosecution in the Criminal Court of Kings and in the before County, proceeding the State. Plaintiff suffered loss and was degraded in the esteem of the cc--üñity. 36. This action falls within one year or more of the exceptions set forth in Section 1602 of the Civil Practice Law and Rules. defendants' 37. The conduct was willful, wanton, reckless, malicious and/or eylibited a gross indifference to, and a callous disregard for human life, and the rights of others, and mor safety particularly, the rights, life and safety of MARIA IDROVO as a result of the defendant's malicion prosecution. 38. The above acts constituted reckless, wañton miscoñduct and were willfully and maliciously directed against the plaintiff. 39. The plaintiff, because of the foregoing reckless and malicious actions, is entitled tc excmplary or punitive damages against the defendants, THE CITY OF NEW YORK, NEW YORK DOES" CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT and NEW YORK CITY POLICE OFFICERS "JOHN 1-100 (as employees, agents, servants of the NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT) in a sum which exceeds the jurisdictional limit of all lower Courts which would otherwise have jurisdiction. AS AND FOR A FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION 40. Plaintiff repeats and realleges each and every allegation contained in the above paragraphs of the Complaint as if fully set forth at length herein. 41. That the aforesaid conduct on the part of the defendants, THE CITY OF NEW YORK NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT and NEW YORK CITY POLICE OFFICERS "JOHN DOES" 1-100 (as employees, agents, servants of the NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT) constituted a violation of the plaintiff, MARIA IDROVO's civil rights under 42 USC 1983 in that the SACCO&FILLAS, LLP 9 of 15 FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 06/11/2021 03:09 PM INDEX NO. 514169/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/11/2021 plaintiff was deprived of her rights, privileges and immüñities secured to her the Constitution and by laws of the U.S.A. and the New York State Constitution by one who under color of a statute or regulation of a state, caused the plaintiff to be so deprived. 42. That the aforesaid use of excessive force on the plaintiff by the defeñdants, and the subsequent false arrest and imprison-ment of the plaintiff by the defeñdañts, deprived the plaintiff of the constitutional right to bodily security and liberty under the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, and was an unreasonable physical seizure of the plaintiff under the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. 43. That as a result of the aforesaid occurrence, the plaintiff, MARIA IDROVO, was esüsed to and did sustain severe, serious and protracted injuries to her person and body. defendants' 44. Due to negligence, plaintiff is entitled to damages in a sum which execeds the jurisdictional limit of all lower Courts which would otherwise have jurisdiction. 45. That said incident and resulting injuries to the plaintifE MARIA IDROVO, were caused solely as a result of the unintentional consequence of an intêñtional act on the part of the arresting officer, without any culpable conduct on the part of the plaintiff, MARIA IDROVO contributing thereto. 46. That as a result of the foregoing, plaintiff is entitled to damages in the sum which exceeds the jurisdictional limit of all lower Courts which would otherwise have jurisdiction. AS AND FOR A FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION ON BEHALF OF PLAINTIFF AGAINST THE DEFENDANTS FOR