U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, 2014

Vessa v. City of White Plains

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Decided December 11, 2014 · Hall, Lynch, Wesley

588 F. App'x 9

Counsel

Holly Ostrov-Ronai, Ronai & Ronai, LLP, Port Chester, N.Y., for Plaintiff-Appellant., Lalit K. Loomba (Peter A. Meisels, Allison Holubis, on the brief), Wilson Elser Moskowitz Edelman & Dicker LLP, White Plains, N.Y., for Defendants-Appellees City of White Plains, City of White Plains Police Department, White Detective Lieutenant Eric Fischer, and Chief James M. Bradley. ., Adam Rodriguez, Associate County Attorney, for Robert F. Meehan, Westches-ter County Attorney, White Plains, N.Y., for Defendant-Appellee Westchester County.

Cases that cite this one

8 later published cases cite this decision. The 7 that cite it most often are listed here.

Garcia Jimenez v. County of Suffolk (District Court, E.D. New York 2025)
(HC) Aguilera v. Burton (United States District Court for the Eastern District of California 2025)
Lotto v. Tendler (United States District Court for the District of Connecticut 2023)
31FO, LLC v. Incorporated Village of Lloyd Harbor (District Court, E.D. New York 2023)
Selvam v. United States of America (District Court, E.D. New York 2021)
Cox v. Village of Pleasantville (District Court, S.D. New York 2017)
Green v. City of Mount Vernon (District Court, S.D. New York 2015)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

SUMMARY ORDER

Frank Vessa (“Vessa”) appeals from a decision of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York dismissing his complaint for failure to state a claim pursuant to Federal Rule *10of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts, procedural history, and issues on appeal.

We review de novo the grant of a motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Harris v. Mills, 572 F.3d 66, 71 (2d Cir. 2009). “We need not affirm for the reasons expressed by the district court but may affirm on any ground supported by the record.” McNally Wellman Co. v. N.Y. State Elec. & Gas Corp., 63 F.3d 1188, 1194 (2d Cir. 1995). Although it is not entirely clear whether the district court applied a heightened pleading standard in certain parts of its analysis, upon our independent review we agree that Vessa’s First, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendment claims were properly dismissed for failure to plausibly allege sufficient facts to support a claim for relief. Furthermore, we affirm the decision of the district court to decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Vessa’s state law claims. We have considered all of Vessa’s remaining arguments and find them to be without merit.

For the reasons stated above, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.