13‐3709 (L) Alberto Rivera Bey v. City of New York, et al.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT

SUMMARY ORDER

RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2007, IS PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS COURT’S LOCAL RULE 32.1.1. WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE FEDERAL APPENDIX OR AN ELECTRONIC DATABASE (WITH THE NOTATION “SUMMARY ORDER”). A PARTY CITING A SUMMARY ORDER MUST SERVE A COPY OF IT ON ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL.

At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of New York, on the 29th day of October, two thousand fourteen.

PRESENT: AMALYA L. KEARSE, CHESTER J. STRAUB, RICHARD C. WESLEY, Circuit Judges. ____________________________________________

ALBERTO RIVERA BEY,

Plaintiff‐Appellee‐Cross‐Appellant,

‐v.‐ Nos. 13‐3709(L), 13‐3746

CITY OF NEW YORK, WILLIAM J. FRASER, individually and as Commissioner for the New York City Department of Corrections, MICHAEL CARUSO, individually and as Inspector General of the New York City Department of Investigation, RICHARD S. MEZAN, as Executor of the Estate of the late Edward Kurinsky, individually and as Commissioner of Investigation for the City of New York,

1 Defendants‐Appellants‐Cross‐Appellees

Estate of the late EDWARD KURINSKY, individually and as Commissioner of Investigation for the City of New York, ROSEMARIE MALDONADO, individually and as Administrative Law Judge of the Office of Administrative Trials and Hearings,

Defendants.* ____________________________________________

FOR PLAINTIFF‐APPELLEE‐CROSS‐ IRENE DONNA THOMAS, Thomas APPELLANT: & Associates, Brooklyn, NY.

FOR DEFENDANTS‐APPELLANTS‐ MAXWELL DOUGLAS LEIGHTON, CROSS‐APPELLEES: Assistant Corporation Counsel (Jeffrey D. Friedlander, Acting Corporation Counsel, Larry A. Sonnenshein, Assistant Corporation Counsel, Mordecai Newman, Assistant Corporation Counsel, on the brief), for Corporation Counsel of the City of New York, New York, NY.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Nathan, J.).

UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED,

ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the judgment is AFFIRMED in part and

REVERSED in part and Defendants’ appeal is DISMISSED as moot.

* The Clerk of the Court is directed to amend the caption as above.

2 Plaintiff cross‐appeals from an amended judgment entered following trial

in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York

(Nathan, J.).

Specifically, Plaintiff challenges (1) the district court’s vacatur of the

punitive damages awarded by the jury, (2) the sufficiency of the back pay award,

and (3) the district court’s denial of further equitable or injunctive relief. See Bey

v. City of New York, Nos. 99 Civ. 3873, 01 Civ. 9406 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 4, 2013). For

the reasons stated in our Summary Order in the related appeal of Bey v. City of

New York, No. 13‐3733, we REVERSE the district court’s vacatur of the punitive

damages, but otherwise AFFIRM the Amended Judgment of the district court.

Defendants appeal in this action simply to reserve the issue of attorney’s

fees pending resolution of the related appeal in Bey v. City of New York, No. 13‐

3733. Given our resolution of that action, Defendants’ appeal in this case is

DISMISSED as moot.

FOR THE COURT: Catherine O’Hagan Wolfe, Clerk

3