| Murray v City of New York |
| 2010 NY Slip Op 05257 [74 AD3d 550] |
| June 15, 2010 |
| Appellate Division, First Department |
| Tunishia R. Murray, Appellant, v City of New York,Respondent. |
—[*1] Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York (Elizabeth I. Freedman of counsel),for respondent.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Eileen A. Rakower, J.), entered September 29,2009, which denied plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on her cause of action for falsearrest and false imprisonment, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Plaintiff failed to submit evidence in admissible form sufficient to establish entitlement tojudgment as a matter of law, but relied solely on an affirmation of counsel annexing an arrestreport, and a complaint verified by counsel, who had no personal knowledge of the facts (seeZuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 563 [1980]). Furthermore, plaintiff isincorrect that she can prevail by establishing that she was arrested in the late afternoon after asearch warrant was executed at her apartment, held overnight, and released the next day after theDistrict Attorney's office declined to prosecute. An action for false imprisonment may arise,even if an arrest was lawful in its inception, if there was an "unnecessary delay" in arraigning theplaintiff (Lewis v Counts, 81 AD2d 857 [1981]), or if the conduct of the police "towardplaintiff after the arrest was not legally justifiable" (Clark v Nannery, 292 NY 105, 108[1944]). However, plaintiff's bare showing, assuming it were based on admissible evidence, wasinsufficient to establish that there was any unnecessary delay in arraignment (see CPL140.20 [1]; People ex rel. Maxian v Brown, 77 NY2d 422, 424 [1991]), or that shecontinued to be held without legal justification after a determination was made that there was notreasonable cause to believe she had committed the offense for which she was arrested(see CPL 140.20 [4]). [*2]Plaintiff's failure to make aprima facie showing requires a denial of the motion, regardless of the sufficiency of the City'sopposing papers (see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324 [1986]).Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Moskowitz, DeGrasse, Abdus-Salaam and Manzanet-Daniels,JJ.