Case Detail
CitationRamos v. City of New York, 729 N.Y.S.2d 678 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
CrimeSex crimes
Pros. First NameUKN
Pros. Last NameUKN
Trial Year1985
BodyAppeals court
OpinionA day care aide filed a § 1983 suit against the District Attorney and the city and alleged 12 causes of action including various due process and tort theories connected to false arrest, false imprisonment, malicious prosecution, negligence, and various civil rights violations. The New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, held that the aide's allegations were sufficient to state a claim for a § 1983 violation against city and the aide's allegations that his Brady rights were violated as consequence of district attorney's management policies and practices were sufficient to state a § 1983 violation against city. "Plaintiff's theory of § 1983 liability relies in part on the contention that the District Attorney's Office exhibited a pattern of conduct, especially but not limited to Brady violations, that deprived him of his federal constitutional rights. The theory has support in precedent (see, Walker, supra [Brooklyn District Attorney's history of Brady violations valid basis for § 1983 liability]; accord Babi–Ali, supra, at 274 [Queens District Attorney's history of Brady violations and citations therein] ). Hence, plaintiff should be entitled to relevant information cited in his second supplemental demand for discovery and inspection, after in camera inspection and redaction by the court if necessary, pertaining to the alleged pattern including other Brady violations, including information relating to internal discipline or other remedial action taken in that regard, matters directly relevant to plaintiff's theory of liability." In 2003, the parties settled for $5 million - at the time the largest settlement ever in New York State for a wrongful conviction.
Determination Year2001
Misconduct TypeP
C/S EffectReversal of conviction
Pros. Misc. ReportedUKN
Sanction TypeUKN
Web link