Mazurkiewicz v. New York City Transit Authority

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that New York City Transit Police officers who observed the plaintiff step over a turnstile without paying his fare with a token had probable cause to arrest him for theft of services
• holding that “[p]laintiff cannot argue that defendants engaged in intentional conduct that forms the basis of an assault and § 1983 excessive force claim and also argue that defendants were negligent towards plaintiff.”
• concluding that New York City Transit Police officers who observed the plaintiff step over a turnstile without paying his fare with a token had probable cause to arrest him for theft of services
• holding that a “[p]laintiff cannot argue that defendants engaged in intentional conduct that forms the basis of an assault and § 1983 excessive force claim and also argue that defendants were negligent towards plaintiff”
• “[The] factual dispute over the amounts of force used, and the injuries suffered by and inflicted by the parties, bar[s] summary judgment.”
• “Since there was an altercation between the parties, the officers could not have been acting maliciously in charging plaintiff with assault, given the police officers’ defense of qualified immunity.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).