This is why it is hard to win false arrest cases

As if this actually bears repeating, and it does not, probable cause is a defense to any false arrest claim, and probable cause is a low bar for the police to satisfy. This means many false arrest claims never see the light of day, even if the criminal defendant was found innocent in criminal court, and even if the charges against the criminal defendant were dropped prior to trial. This case is a good example of how all of this works.

The case is Dorsey v. Gannon, a summary order issued on March 29. Plaintiff was arrested and the charges were dismissed, but that does not give plaintiff a trial. What would give her a trial is proof that no reasonable officer would have arrested plaintiff under the circumstances. Again, that's a low bar for the police. When I say "no reasonable officer," I mean "no reasonable officer." The courts do not want the police to avoid arresting someone in fear that there might be a lawsuit if the arrest turned out to be wrong. You can only sue if the arrest was totally unreasonable. Qualified immunity has been expanded over the years, making it difficult for plaintiffs to overcome that defense. There was talk a few years ago of eliminating this immunity, but that movement has stalled.

What happened here is that the police reviewed surveillance video of a woman with a fake Pennsylvania driver's license trying to cash forged checks at banks in the metropolitan area. A Pennsylvania detective told the NYPD that the video appeared to depict plaintiff, and he provided a photograph of plaintiff and her criminal history. Plaintiff's probation officer also agreed the photo depicted plaintiff. Solid case, right?

But wait! After plaintiff provided alibis proving she was someplace else when the surveillance footage was taken, the charges were dismissed. Plaintiff was innocent!

If you know false arrest law, you know where this is going. Yes, plaintiff spent two days in jail before posting bail, which is a serious hardship and an injustice. But the officers did reasonably think it was plaintiff in the video footage, based on corroborating evidence. The arrest, in hindsight, was bad. But the Court of Appeals (Jacobs, Sullivan and Leval) finds the police acted reasonably in taking her into custody. Since the police dropped the charges after the alibis exonerated her, there is no reason to sue the police under 42 U.S.C. 1983, the national civil rights law.