2008 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 3-12-2008 

# D ri sco v . Eli z a b eth P r e c e de n t i al or N on-P r e c e de n t i al : N on-P r e c e de n t i al D ocke t N o . 06-3166

F o l low thi s a nd a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi l l a no va . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2008

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou gh t t o you for f r e e a nd ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i l l a no va U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Re posit or y

. It h as be e n a c c e pt e d for inclusion in 2008 D e c i sion s b y a n author i z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i l l a no va U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Re posit or y

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c on t a ct Be n j amin . C a rl s on@l a

w . vi l l a no va . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion
" Dr i s c o v . El i za be th" (2008). 2008 D e cisio n s . P ape r 1455. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi l l a no va . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2008/1455Honora ble PetreseTucke r, District Judge f or the Ea stern District of Pennsylvania, sitting * by designation. 

### NO T P RE CE DENT I AL

UN I TE D S TA TE S C OU RT OF AP PE AL S FO R T HE TH IRD C IRCU IT No: 06- 3166 LO RRAINE DRI SC O, Appe l l ant
v. CI TYOF EL I ZA BE TH ; PO LI CE DE PA RT MENT OF TH E CI TY OF ELI ZABETH; DETECTI VE ALBERT MENDES; DE TE CT IVE ISM AE L O LIVE RO ; DET EC TIVE FRAN K S AL TA RE LL I; OF FI CE R H URLE R; OF FI CE R M EO LA ; CO UN TYOF UN I ON ; UN I ONCO UN TYPO LI CE DE PA RT MENT ; UN I ONCO UN TY PROSECUTOR' S OFFI CE; DETECTI VE J OHN KAMINSKAS; DE TE CT I VE KE VIN F OL EY ; LI EU TENANT BL AI R M INE O; INV ES TI GA TO R J OHN K OWAL SKI ; PR OS EC UT OR TH OM AS MANA HAN; RE GINACAUL FI EL D; AS SI ST AN T P RO SE CU TO R ANNLU VE RA ; DE TE CT I VE TRAC Y D I AZ ; DE TE CT I VE KO URY; DE TE CT I VE J . FU RD A; DO NN A M
. HANS EN , FO RENS I C C HE MI ST ; DETECTI VE ANA ZSAK; DOROTHY J
. GORDI MER; AS SI ST AN T P RO SE CU TO R D EB ORAH W HI TE ; AS SI ST AN T P RO SE CU TO R W I LL I AM KO LANO ; DE TE CT I VE MC KINL AY ;

UN KN OWN JOH N AND JANE DO E(S), a llin thei r off ic ia l andi nd i vi du a lc a

pa c i t i e s ; DR . SH AI KH , ME DI CA L E XA MINE R A p p ea l from the U n it ed S tat es D istri ct C o u rt fort he D i s t r i ctof N ew J er s ey ( 03- cv- 00297) D istri ct Ju d g e: H o n o rab le Jo sep h A
. G ree n aw ay , Jr. Subm i t t ed Pur s uantt o T hi r d C i r cui tL A R 34. 1( a)

February7, 2008 B e f o re : M C K E E , A M B R O , C i r cui tJudges and TUCKER , D is t r i ct

Judge *2 ( O pi ni on Fi l ed; M ar ch 12, 2008
M C K E E , C i r cui tJ udge: L or r ai ne D r i s co appe al s t he di s t r i ctcour t ’ s di s m i s s al of ci vi l r i ght s cl ai m s s he b ro u g h t af

ter c rim in a l ch a rg e s a g a in st h e r w e re d ism iss e d . T h e d istric t co u rt ru led th a t all of D r i s co’ s cl ai m s w er e t i m e- barr ed as t o al l par t i es . D r i s co now chal l enges t hatpor t i on of t he di s t r i ctcour t ’ s opi ni on di s m i s s i ng hercl ai m s fori m pr operi nves t i gat i on and
m al i ci ous pr os ecut i on bas ed on herfai l ur e t o fi l e herci vi l compl ai ntw i t hi n t w o y ear s of t he dat e thatt he cr i m i nal char ges w er e di s m i s s ed. B eca us e the part i es now agr ee thatt he d istric t co u rt m a d e a m ista k e a b o u t th e d a te th e c h a rg e s w e re d ism iss e d , w e w ill v a c a te t he d i stri ctcou rt ’s order i n p artand rem and for further proceedings. D r i s co’ s fede r al compl ai ntw as fi l ed on J anuary22, 2003, and an a m ended compl ai ntw as fi l ed on J anuary27, 2003. I n t he opi ni on acc om pany i ng t he or der dis m i ssi ng cert ai n o f D ri sco’s cl ai m s und er the ap pli cable tw o-y ear s t atute of l i m i t at i on s, th e d istric t co u rt e x p lain e d :

T h e N JT C A [N ew Jerse yT o rtC lai m s A ct] sets a ti m e li m ito f tw o y ea rs forfi l i ng s ui t . []
. . . . T he t i m e fr ame fort he al l eged i m pr oper i nves t i gat i on i s uncl ear , but , i n anyevent , t he ca us e of a ct i on m us thave acc rued byt he t i m e t he cha r ges agai ns tPl ai nt i ff w er e di s m i s s ed on J anuary26, 2000. B eca us e more t han tw o y ear s el aps ed betw een the l at es tpos s i bl e t i m e of a ccrual of t he i m pr operi nves t i gat i on cl ai m and the dat e of f i l i ng t hatcl ai m i s t i m e- barr ed. L as t l y , t he mal i ci ous pr os ecut i on c la im a c c ru e d o n th e d a te o f d is m is s a l o f

th e c h a rg e s a g a in s t P la in tif f. [ ]. B eca us e more t han tw o y ear s el aps ed betw een the t i m e of a ccrual of t he m al i ci ous pr os ecut i on cl ai m and the dat e of f i l i ng t hatcl ai m i s t i m ebarr ed.3

D ist
. C t. O p . at 4-5 (cit ati o n s o m itted). D r i s co now m ai nt ai ns t hatt he di s t r i ctcour terr ed bec aus e the cha r ges agai ns ther
w er e notdi s m i s s ed unt i l J anuary23, 2001, r athert han on J anuary23, 2000, as t he di s t r i ct
c o u rt b e liev e d . T h e d e f e n d a n ts d o n o t d isp u te th a t as se rtio n . A n s. B r. at 1 9 (“ T h e C o u rt, in e rr o r, i d e n tif

ie d th e d is m is s a l d a te a s h a v in g o c c u rr e d o n J a n u a ry 2 3 , 2 0 0 0 .” ). N evert hel es s , forr eas ons unknow n t o us , r athert han al l ow i ng t he di s t r i ctcour tt o corr ect i t s o w n e r r o r p u r s u a n t t o F e d. R. C iv. P. 5 9( e ), Drisc o f ile d th is a pp e a l. D efe ndant s cont end thatD r i s co’ s cl ai m s r emai n t i m e- barr ed r egar dl es s of t he d i s t r i c tc o u r t ’ s e r r o rb e c a u s e t h e ma l i c i o u s p r o s e c u t i o n a n d i mp r o p e ri n v e s t i g a t i o n c l a i ms
w er e as s er t ed i n t he amended compl ai nt , fi l ed on J anuary27, 2003, r athert han i n t he
o rig in a l co m p lain t f

iled o n Ja n u a ry2 2 , 2 0 0 3 . T h e ya lso a rg u e th e ya re e n tit led to di s m i s s al bas ed on “good f ai t h” i m m uni t yundert he N J T C A , an ar gum entr ai s ed i n t he di s t r i ctcour tbutnotaddr es s ed bec aus e thatcour tbel i eved thatal l cl ai m s w er e t i m ebarr ed. Si nce the di s t r i ctcour tneverrul ed on the mer i t s of t hes e cl ai m s , w e bel i eve that t heycan be s tbe r es ol ved byt he di s t r i ctcour ton r emand. In li g h t of

the f o reg o ing d iscu ssion , w e w il l vac ate the d ec isi o n o f th e d istri ct co u rt d ism iss in g th e c laim s o f im p ro p e r in v e stig a tio n a n d m a licio u s p ro se c u tio n a s to a ll defe nd ants . T he d eci si on of the cou rti s ot herw i se affi rm ed in al l res pects .