Case Name: Lisa ZALASKI, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF BRIDGEPORT POLICE DEPARTMENT and Deputy Chief James J. Honis, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-08-29
Citations: 475 F. App'x 805
Docket Number: No. 11-3033-cv
Parties: Lisa ZALASKI, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF BRIDGEPORT POLICE DEPARTMENT and Deputy Chief James J. Honis, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Present: ROBERT A. KATZMANN, RICHARD C. WESLEY, and PETER W. HALL, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 475
Pages: 805–806

Head Matter:
Lisa ZALASKI, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF BRIDGEPORT POLICE DEPARTMENT and Deputy Chief James J. Honis, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 11-3033-cv.
United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
Aug. 29, 2012.
Derek V. Oatis, Lobo & Novak, LLP, Manchester, CT, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
Betsy A. Edwards, Office of the City Attorney, Bridgeport, CT, for Defendants-Appellees.
Present: ROBERT A. KATZMANN, RICHARD C. WESLEY, and PETER W. HALL, Circuit Judges.
The Clerk of the Court is directed to amend the official caption as noted.

Opinion:
SUMMARY ORDER
Plaintiff-Appellant Lisa Zalaski appeals from a June 29, 2011 judgment of the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut (Bryant, J.) granting defendants' motion for summary judgment and dismissing plaintiffs sole claim, brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, that defendants violated her right to freedom of speech and assembly under the First Amendment at a demonstration held in October 2006. We assume the parties' familiarity with the pertinent facts and procedural history.
Having previously remanded this case and given the parties a full opportunity to provide additional, relevant information that would illuminate the issues on appeal, see Zalaski v. City of Bridgeport Police Dep't, 613 F.3d 336, 337 (2d Cir.2010) (per curiam), and upon our de novo review of the instant record, we find no material error that would cause us to reverse. See McGullam v. Cedar Graphics, Inc., 609 F.3d 70, 75 (2d Cir.2010). Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is hereby AFFIRMED.