2002 Decisions

Opinions of the United

States Court of Appeals

for the Third Circuit

7-29-2002

Vassallo v. Timoney

Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential

Docket No. 01-4124

Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2002

This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova

University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 2002 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova

University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact Benjamin.Carlson@law.villanova.edu.

Recommended Citation

"Vassallo v. Timoney" (2002). 2002 Decisions. Paper 454.

http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2002/454
 NOT PRECEDENTIAL 

 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

 FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT 

 

 No: 01-4124 

 MICHAEL VASSALLO, 

 Appellant 

 v. 

 JOHN TIMONEY, COMMISSIONER - PHILADELPHIA POLICE 

 DEPARTMENT; RICHARD ZAPPILE, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER - 

 PHILADELPHIA POLICE DEPARTMENT; ALOYSIUS MARTIN, 

 LIEUTENANT - PHILADELPHIA POLICE DEPARTMENT; 

 JOHN NORRIS, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER - PHILADELPHIA 

 POLICE DEPARTMENT; JAMES DANBACH, POLICE OFFICER - 

 PHILADELPHIA POLICE DEPARTMENT; JAMES WILLIAMSON, 

 SPECIAL AGENT; JOHN MCGRATH, POLICE OFFICER - 

 PHILADELPHIA POLICE DEPARTMENT; CYNTHIA O’LEARY, 

 POLICE OFFICER - PHILADELPHIA POLICE DEPARTMENT; 

 THOMAS HYERS, POLICE OFFICER - PHILADELPHIA POLICE 

 DEPARTMENT; DONALD GILLESPIE, POLICE OFFICER - 

 PHILADELPHIA POLICE DEPARTMENT; CITY OF PHILADELPHIA 

 

 On Appeal for the United States District Court 

 for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania 

 (Civil No. 00-CV-0084) 

 District Court: Hon. Jay C. Waldman 

 

 Submitted Pursuant to Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a) 

 July 15, 2002 

 

 Before: McKEE, WEIS and DUHE, Circuit Judges. 

 OPINION OF THE COURT 

 (Filed: July 29, 2002) 

 

McKEE, Circuit Judge. 

 Michael Vassallo was a former sergeant with the Philadelphia Police Department. 

This case arises from his termination as a police officer and a subsequent federal 

prosecution for his alleged deprivation of the civil rights of an arrested man. He 

appeals from the district court’s grant of summary judgment to the defendants on his 

1983 malicious prosecution and false arrest claims, his First Amendment retaliation 

claim, his municipal liability claim for failure to reinstate to the Police Department and 

state law claims for malicious prosecution, false arrest and intentional infliction of 

emotional distress. Our review of the district court’s grant of summary judgment is 

plenary. Huang v. BP Amoco Corp., 271 F.3d 560, 564 (3d Cir. 2001). 

 Inasmuch as the district court (Waldman, J.) has already set forth the factual and 

procedural history of this case, we find it unnecessary to repeat that history here. See 

Vassallo v. Timoney, No. 00-84, 2001 WL 1243517 (E.D. Pa. October 15, 2001). 

Moreover, the district court, in its Memorandum Opinion and Order, has carefully and 

completely explained its reasons for denying Vassallo the relief he seeks and granting 

summary judgment to the defendants. Because of the district court’s thoughtful and 

searching analysis, we need not engage in a redundant analysis simply to reach the same 

result. 

 Accordingly, we will affirm the district court substantially for the reasons set forth 

in the district court’s Memorandum Opinion without further elaboration. 

 
TO THE CLERK OF THE COURT: 

 

 Please file the foregoing Opinion. 

 /s/Theodore A. McKee 

 Circuit Judg