13-4344

L.H. v. County of Livingston

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT

SUMMARY ORDER

RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED

ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2007, IS PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF APPELLATE

PROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS COURT’S LOCAL RULE 32.1.1. WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A

DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE FEDERAL APPENDIX OR AN

ELECTRONIC DATABASE (WITH THE NOTATION “SUMMARY ORDER”). A PARTY CITING A SUMMARY ORDER MUST

SERVE A COPY OF IT ON ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL.

1 At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals

2 for the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall United

3 States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of New York,

on the 22nd 4 day of January, two thousand fifteen.

5

6 PRESENT: DENNIS JACOBS,

7 DEBRA ANN LIVINGSTON,

8 RAYMOND J. LOHIER, JR.,

9 Circuit Judges.

10

11 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -X

12 L.H., individually, and as parent and

13 guardian of T.D., and T.D., 

14 Plaintiffs-Appellees,

15

16 -v.- 13-4344

17

18 COUNTY OF LIVINGSTON, THOMAS E. MORAN,

19 individually and in his official

20 capacity as former District Attorney

21 of Livingston County, LINDSAY P.

22 QUINTILONE, individually and in her

23 official capacity as former Assistant

24 District Attorney of Livingston

25 County, and other known or unknown

26 employees of the County of Livingston, 

27 Defendants-Appellants.

28 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -X

1
1 FOR APPELLANTS: Jeremy A. Colby, Michael P.

2 McClaren, Webster Szanyi LLP,

3 Buffalo, New York.

4

5 FOR APPELLEES: Jeffrey Wicks, PLLC, Rochester,

6 New York.

7

8 Appeal from an order of the United States District

9 Court for the Western District of New York (Telesca, J.).

10

11 UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED

12 AND DECREED that the order of the district court be

13 AFFIRMED. 

14

15 Defendant Lindsay P. Quintilone, a former prosecutor,

16 appeals from an order of the United States District Court

17 for the Western District of New York (Telesca, J.), denying

18 (in part) her motion to dismiss on grounds of absolute and

19 qualified immunity. See Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511,

20 524-30 (1985). We assume the parties’ familiarity with the

21 underlying facts, the procedural history, and the issues

22 presented for review. 

23

24 As the district court held, defendant’s absolute

25 immunity argument is foreclosed by Hill v. City of New York,

26 45 F.3d 653 (2d Cir. 1995), in which we denied absolute

27 immunity to a state prosecutor on facts that are materially

28 the same. 

29

30 The claim for qualified immunity was abandoned, for

31 unknown reasons, in Quintilone’s reply brief (“[f]or

32 purposes of this appeal only”). So we will not consider it

33 at this time. Of course, she may renew the defense before

34 the district court at a later stage (and, if necessary, may

35 seek further appellate review, see Behrens v. Pelletier, 516

36 U.S. 299, 305-11 (1996)).

37

38 For the foregoing reasons, and finding no merit in

39 defendant’s other arguments, we hereby AFFIRM the order of

40 the district court.

41

42 FOR THE COURT:

43 CATHERINE O’HAGAN WOLFE, CLERK

44

2