Azurdia v. City of New York

OPINION & ORDER Plaintiffs, Diego Azurdia and Marcella Chibbaro, bring this civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. §1983 and New York state law against the City of New York (“the City”) and several of its police officers (collectively, “defendants”). The lawsuit arises out of an April 23, 2017 incident in which Jean Germain, an officer employed by the New York Police Department (“NYPD”), shot and killed plaintiffs’ pet dog, Lola. At the time of the shooting, Germain and another NYPD officer, Barty Toribio, were investigating the report of a taxi driver who alleged that Azurdia had failed to pay him for a ride he had recently taken from the Bronx to his home in Brooklyn. After the shooting, Azurdia was arrested for theft of services in violation of New York Penal Law §165.15, and he was subsequently processed at the 77th police precinct in Brooklyn. Though Lola was taken to the Blue Pearl veterinary hospital for emergency medical treatment, the doctors were unable to resuscitate her, and she succumbed to her injuries at the hospital.Plaintiffs filed this lawsuit on July 23, 2018. They assert several claims for the injuries they suffered as a result of Lola’s fatal shooting and Azurdia’s arrest and prosecution. The City has moved to dismiss all of plaintiffs’ claims pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). For the following reasons, the City’s motion is granted in part and denied in part.FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUNDAt approximately 3:15 a.m. on April 23, 2017, Diego Azurdia took a taxi from the Bronx to his home in Brooklyn. See Second Am. Compl. 16, ECF No. 17 (“SAC”).¹ When the car arrived at its destination, Azurdia realized that he did not have money to pay the driver for the ride. Id. 17. In response, he and the driver arranged a deal: Azurdia agreed to collect the necessary fare from his apartment and, in exchange, the driver would hold Azurdia’s New York City Identification Card (“ID” or “ID card”) as collateral until he returned with the payment. Id. 18. Azurdia entered his apartment, but as he began to collect the money he owed, he inadvertently “dozed off.” Id.

20, 22.After approximately twenty minutes had passed, the taxi driver grew concerned. Id.