[1]     

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT August Term, 1995

, [5]     

Decided: July 3, 1996

, [6]      IN RE: STATE POLICE LITIGATION " />

Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

In Re State Police Litigation, 88 F.3D 111 (2d Cir. 07/03/1996)

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT August Term, 1995

No. 886

Docket No. 95-7614

88 F.3d 111, 1996.C02.0000324 <http://www.versuslaw.com>

Decided: July 3, 1996

IN RE: STATE POLICE LITIGATION

Before: KEARSE, MAHONEY, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

[8]    

Argued: December 21, 1995

[9]    

CONNECTICUT CRIMINAL DEFENSE LAWYERS ASSOCIATION, JOSEPH KEEFE, Individually and as President of Connecticut Criminal Defense Lawyers Association, JOHN R. GULASH, WILLIAM J. SWEENEY, DENISE DERBY, DONALD COUTURE, TIMOTHY B. YOUNG, RODERICK YOUNG, BARBARA SCHUYLER, CONRAD SEIFERT, Attorney, WILLIAM GERACE, Attorney, MARTIN MINELLA, Attorney, WILLIAM DOW, JAY MARTIN SULZACH, Attorney, ROBERT A. SKOVGAARD, CHARLES E. SKOVGAARD, JAMES M. HIGGINS, Attorney, KEVIN O'BRIEN, Attorney, TIMOTHY MOYNIHAN, Attorney, MARK SHAPERA, JOSEPH J. MASLER, PAUL ARVAI, EVA BELLINE, JOSEPH BELLINE, LISA M. BELLINE, ISMAEL SANTIAGO, JAMES C. CARBONE, FRANK GONZALEZ, JR., JEFFREY IRWIN, DAVID GARFIELD, JOHN MCBRIDE, WILLIAM BRUCE, THEODORE L. CALLANDS, JOHN DAVID PANULA, III, CAROLYN M. CAPOZZIELLO, THOMAS W. CAPOZZIELLO, A. CAPOZZIELLO, MYRON J. STEPHENSON, GEORGE WHITEHEAD, JOSEPH A. RICH, SR., ROBERT A. ROSA, SONJA VAN VALKENBURGH, MICHAEL J. MEZZATESTA, SUSAN PREGLER, RICHARD REARDON, MANUEL E. FERRIERA, GREGORY HUDSON, MATHEW A. CAPOZZIELLO, TOM CIAROLO, DAVID WHITE, RAFAEL A. CABRERA, MICHAEL WEST, RICHARD G. PARADIS, JEFFREY MEMBRINO, DANIEL MEMBRINO, LORENZO SANTROPIETRO, GENE MANCINO, HAROLD D. NICHOLS, MARK NICHOLS, LISA ANDERSON, RAYMOND MIKOLINSKI, LORRAINE MIKOLINSKI, WILLIAM C. RADO, CHARLES W. KASMER, JAMES REARDON, DANIEL FERRIERA, JOSEPH A. RICH, JR., BARBARA RICH, JOHN M. LEBEL, TONYA MILLER, BRYAN S. GOLEMOWSKI, DAVID R. CAPASSO, RAYMOND POVINELLI, LUKE WARNER, CHARLES F. KIMMS, JAMES E. JONES, PAUL A. LAROSA, JAMES MASLER, ADELGARD L. MASLER, MICHAEL P. PANE, CARMELINA L. PANE, KEITH W. RADO, RALPH SHORES, JOSEPH W. MIRON, ADAM J. SOARES, STEVE HANFORD, WAYNE M. CHRISTINAT, KENT KELSEY, DANIEL ELSBREE, WILLIAM PARKER, DEBORAH ARVAI, DOMENIC SANTILLI, BRIAN PANETTA, STEPHANIE WEINBURG, DAVID WEINBERG, ALLEN D'ANTINIO, THOMAS GAHAN, STEVEN W. KRAUSS, BETTY LITTLE, DAVID LITTLE, ROBERT LITTLE, JAMES P. JANULET, JEFFREY FLUERY, GLENN E. COE, ANTHONY GALAZAN, LAWRENCE R. SMITH, JUAN CRESPO, THOMAS GUGLIOTT, WILLIAM LEWIS, JAMES M. CAVANAUGH, HENRY L. DESCHAMPS, LEE M. ELLIOTT, SANTO FRANZO, ROBERT J. GEOGHAN, JAMES JOHNSTON, DONALD W. KULISCH, PETER G. LAWSON, WILLIAM M. LUCAS, JR., FRANCIS W. MARTIN, BRUCE B. McINTYRE, RONALD NANFITO, DAVID R. RANNIKKO, JULIAN ROGOWSKI, DANIEL ST. JOHN, NORMAN A. SOUCIE, CHARLES L. WARGAT, JAMES P. WHELAN, RICHARD KEHOE, BRIAN PANETTA and ALPHONSO GREEN,

Plaintiffs-Appellees,

CONNECTICUT STATE POLICE UNION, DAVID PHIPPS, ROBERT KOWALCYZK, MARTIN WHITE, ANA FERREIRA, SAMUEL MAZZATESTA, JAMES O. GASTON, SCOTT B. CHAMBERLAIN, MICHAEL FITZPATRICK, MICHAEL GEORGETTI, CHARLES E. SKOVGAARD, CARMINE GUILIANO, ROBERT McCOY, PHILIP McKNIGHT, RICHARD STEWART, DAVID A. MORAGHAN, DENISE DERBY, ALBERT McGRAIL, ANTHONY C. POLVINO, JOHN A. CURTAS, ALAN COPPOTELLI, CHARLES ARCANGELO, CLAUDE J. KRAMER, CHARLES CHRISTIANO, JR., CARL H. SLUSARCZYK, JR., CARL H. SLUSARCZYK, SR., IRENE SLUSARCZYK, STEVE BATTALINO, TODD A. BENNET, ROBERT GALLO, PATRICIA GALLO, FRED DOUGLAS, LUCY B. DOUGLAS, ROBIN M. CORNUT, THEODORE, R. CALLANDS, THOMAS L. BIRCH, ELAINE C.S. BELL, JAMES C. LAMOND, SHAWN HENNING, WILLIAM H. SCRUGGS, GEORGE F. SAHADI, MICHAEL CALLANDS, JOHN RUGGIERO, ERIC HUDSON, ARLENE HUDSON, MICHAEL BECKFORD, ROBERT CANNING, SHAWN CARIER, WILLIAM CUDDY, JACKIE DURFEE, PHILIP FIORETTI, EDNA GEORGE, PHILIP GEORGE, GERALD GOLARZ, THADDEUS GREBLA, DAVID GUILLELMETTE, DAVID HAINES, KAREN HILL, JAMES HOLCOMB, PHILIP JANIK, YOLANDA JANIK, ALLEN JANUSZEWSKI, FRANK KENNEDY, GEORGE KUDA, JONATHAN LAMSON, SAMI LAPIDES, ALBERT LOSACANO, JAMES BRAD McDONALD, DAVID McKENNA, TINA MENEGUS, WILLIAM PARKER, RAYMOND POVINELLI, DAVID ROSS, BRUCE SHAPIRO, PETER STANCHAK, DANIEL ZSEBIK, DAVID R. LORD, JOHN J. DUNHAM, RONALD W. GRAY, JOHN MENEGUZZO, LISA J. MENEGUZZO, VINCE LEE, CYNTHIA DUBEY, ANTHONY CONSOLINI, VIVIAN SAMBUCO, SCOTT BULEY, BEVERLY POLVINO, CARL FITZGIBBONS, DALE TATEM, GAETANO MARINO, TERRY L. GROEPER, JOSEPH ALBUQUERQUE, JULIE S. ALBUQUERQUE, JOSEPH LONGO, ROBERT QUICK, JOHN CLEARY, JAMES BRADLEY, TERRY L. GROEPER, JOE E. GORMAN, PAUL TORBICKI, PATRICIA J. HUNDT, WILLIAM GILDERSLEEVE, JANE E. WALTON, DON DYBVICK, PETER M. O'BRIEN, HOWARD J. OSTERHOUT, DAVID COLEMAN, KYLE A. TABER, RAYMOND E. KING, RODNEY CLEMENT, MICHAEL L. BOCHICCHIO, DAVID CAREY, GERARD CHARTIER, THEODORE DEROUIN, WILLIAM DWYER, HARRY MOTTRAM, RICHARD D. NICHOLSON, ORMONDE OSBORNE, ROBERT L. OUSTERHOUDT, JOHN RAGAZZI, ORLANDO RAMIREZ, PATRICK T. GRAHAM, JOE LAPUT, THOMAS SHIA, KENNETH STARTZ, ROBERT ANGER, THOMAS NICOLETTI, R.W. KRYSIAK, DAVID O'KEEFE, CHARLES REVOIR, SERGE SAMAL, ROBERT ROSS, THOMAS PIETRINI, MICHAEL COPE, RICHARD D. NICHOLSON, LARRY AHEARN, DAVID BARGER, MICHAEL BOLTON, DAVID DEVITO, JOSEPH DAVID DYNDERSKI, LEE M. ELLIOTT, JULIO FERNANDEZ, JR., RICHARD B. FORD, RICHARD W. GARDNER, KENNETH GOUGH, MICHAEL GRAHAM, CHARLES E. GUNN, R.W. KRYSIAK, JOSEPH LAPUT, MARTIN LANE, WILLLIAM ROBERT MACINTOSH, WILLIAM MACLEAN, MALCOLM R. MAJOR, HENRY MAYNARD, WILLIAM McCASLAND, CARMELO OTERO, CHARLES OUELLETTE, KEVIN A. RODINO, STEVE SALVATORE, WILLIAM SOUKUP, PETER STRNISTE, MARTINIQUE ZHIGAILO, ALEXANDER JONES, DWIGHT CARLSON, ERWIN McKINNEY, DAVID HUTCHINSON, TERRENCE DUNN, DAVID WADDELL, FREDERICK DOWNS, EUGENE TERRY, JAMES ROGERS, SANDRA BROWN, JOHN HILL, DONALD F. LOPRESTO, RAYMOND W. SHOVE, III, GEORGE M. LAWRENCE, KENNETH WILSON, ANGELO F. TOSI, MARIO A. GAROFALO, WILLIAM J. BARBOUR, DONALD BARRY, ROBERT BIRGE, PETER L. CONSIDINE, ENRICO G. SOLIANI, HOWARD SMITH, PETER R. TERENZI, III, KEVIN McCARTHY, BARRIE TOOTHILL and ARTHUR VON HOLTZ,

Intervenors-Plaintiffs-Appellees, v.

LESTER J. FORST, JOHN A. MULLIGAN, JOHN JACEWICZ, MICHAEL STERGIO, WARREN T. SEELEY, RAOUL OULLETTE, FREDERICK DIGGLE, THOMAS ELLIOTT, WILLIAM SMITH, EDWARD DAILEY, PETER PLANTE, ROBERT OFFEN, ROBERT O'SHAUGHNESSY, CHARLES LEVY, JAMES HILTZ, TIMOTHY BARRY, RICHARD LEVINE, RUBIN BRADFORD, JAMES REILLY, STATE OF CONNECTICUT, JOSEPH FAUGHNAN, WALTER SCHOLTZ, JOHN F. WATSON, GEORGE MOORE, DONALD PAIGE, JOHN BARDELLI, ROBERT BESSECHEK, WILFRED BLANCHETTE, HENRY BOURGEOIS, VINCENT BRENNAN, MANFRED BRIDEAU, RICHARD BROZEK, JOHN BURKE, JOHN E. BRYMER, SHAUN BYRNE, JOHN CAPUTO, DOMINIC CONSOLE, RICHARD COVELLO, FRANK D'AMICO, JAMES DARBY, RICHARD DAY, JOHN DEWEY, JOHN FOLEY, CHRISTOPHER GARRITY, ERROL GOFFE, PAUL GUILLOT, BRUCE HAINES, PATRICK HEDGE, DORRIS HUGHES, ROBERT HULL, GEORGE HUSTON, PAUL JASKOLKA, ANTHONY KALKUS, PETER J. KENNEDY, THOMAS KENNEY, CORNELIUS KERWIN, WILLIAM KIRKBY, KENNETH KIRSCHNER, JOHN LEONARD, JOHN LEONE, DONALD LONG, PAUL L. MALLON, DOUGLAS MANAHAN, RICHARD MAYNARD, JOHN McGOLDRICK, JAMES McGRATH, LAWRENCE MERRILL, RONALD MIKULKA, JAMES MOONEY, BERNARD MORAN, ROGER MORGAN, CHARLES A. MORRISON, JR., RAYMOND MORSE, JOHN MUCHERINO, LIEUTENANT MYERS, DONALD NURSE, SCOTT O'MARA, DAVID PAIGE, JOSEPH PALOMBIZIO, JOSEPH PERRY, JOHN REARICK, TROOPER REED, JAMES RICE, RICHARD RIZZUTI, FRANK ROBINSON, JOHN ROFSKY, JAMES ROGERS, ROBERT ROOT, ROYAL SCHIFFER, JAMES SHAY, JAMES SMITH, CHARLES SUPSINSKAS, WILLIAM SYDENHAM, JOHN TAYLOR, MATTHEW TYSKA, RAYMOND WATROUS and ROBERT WELCH,

Defendants-Appellants.

Appeal by defendants from an order of the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut, T.F. Gilroy Daly, Judge, denying motion for summary judgment based on qualified immunity from claims relating to State Police practice of tape-recording telephone calls to, from, and within state police barracks. See 888 F. Supp. 1235 (1995). Motion by plaintiffs to dismiss for lack of appellate jurisdiction. Motion granted; appeal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

AARON S. BAYER, Deputy Attorney General, Hartford, Connecticut (Richard Blumenthal, Attorney General of Connecticut, Henri Alexandre, Carolyn K. Querijero, Jane R. Rosenberg, Assistant Attorneys General, Hartford, Connecticut, John W. Sitarz, Cooney, Scully & Dowling, Hartford, Connecticut, on the brief), for Defendants-Appellants.

CHRISTOPHER D. BERNARD, Bridgeport, Connecticut (Koskoff, Koskoff & Bieder, Bridgeport, Connecticut, Garrett M. Moore, Judith A. Mauzaka, Moore & O'Brien, Cheshire, Connecticut, on the brief), for Plaintiffs-Appellees and Intervenors-Plaintiffs-Appellees.

KEARSE, Circuit Judge:

Defendants Lester J. Forst and other present and former officials of the Connecticut State Police ("State Police") appeal from so much of an order of the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut, T.F. Gilroy Daly, Judge, as denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing claims brought principally under 42 U.S.C. Section(s) 1983 (1994) and Title III of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, 18 U.S.C. Section(s) 2510-2520 (1994) ("Title III"), alleging that between 1978 and 1989 the State Police intercepted, recorded, disclosed, and used, without knowledge or consent of the participants, all telephone calls made to, from, and within State Police barracks, in violation of, inter alia, Title III and the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. The defendant officials sought summary judgment principally on the ground that they were entitled to qualified immunity. The district court denied that part of their motion on the ground that the rights of individual plaintiffs under the above laws were clearly established and that there are genuine issues to be tried as to pertinent factual issues, including (a) whether plaintiffs consented to the recording, and (b) whether and to what extent the State Police listened to any given recorded conversation. On appeal, defendants contend that they are entitled to qualified immunity principally because at the pertinent times it was not clearly established that tape-recording telephone calls, without ever listening to them, violated Title III or the federal Constitution or state law. Plaintiffs have moved to dismiss the appeal for lack of appellate jurisdiction. For the reasons below, we agree with plaintiffs that because the district court denied summary judgment on the ground that there existed questions of fact to be tried with respect to the qualified-immunity defense, the denial was not an immediately appealable order, and we therefore dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

I. BACKGROUND

This class action, a consolidation of several lawsuits, began in November 1989 after the public learned that for more than a decade the State Police had engaged in a practice of automatically recording telephone calls made on lines in each of its barracks. The plaintiff class, as certified by the district court, comprises all persons who participated in telephone calls to, from, or within State Police facilities between January 1, 1978, and November 9, 1989, whose calls were intercepted, recorded, and/or used by defendants in violation of law. The court also certified a plaintiff subclass of current and former State Police employees, other than those named as defendants, who participated in such calls.

The background of the litigation is set forth in detail in the district court's published opinion, see 888 F. Supp. 1235 (1995), and will be summarized here only to the extent pertinent to this appeal. Many of the facts are not in dispute.

A. The State Police Policy and Practice of Recording Calls

The State Police is divided into three districts, each comprising four troops; each troop occupied its own barracks. In or before mid-1978, the State Police installed tape recorders on telephone lines in all 12 barracks plus its Headquarters Message Center. As explained by defendants, the tapes of the recordings "could be referred to in the ordinary course of police business and in furtherance of official police duties" in order to "investigate complaints made by the public against State Police personnel, e.g., internal affairs investigations"; or to "permit dispatchers to replay a communication when the message was not clear, e.g., to hear the street number"; or to "be used in major criminal investigations, e.g., to establish the time a complaint was received and when follow-up responses were made"; or to permit "a quality control check by the inspections unit to determine if the dispatchers and troopers were handling calls properly." (Defendants' Statement of Undisputed Facts Para(s) 6.)

The machines installed by the State Police recorded incoming and outgoing calls indiscriminately. Although a 1978 State Police manual on wiretapping stated that a "call between a lawyer and a client presently the subject of criminal charges can under no circumstances be monitored," Office of the Chief State's Attorney Special Investigations Division Manual on Wire Tapping (1978) ("1978 Wire Tapping Manual"), when persons were arrested or detained and wished to call their attorneys, they were directed to a barracks telephone on which all conversations were routinely recorded. Nor did the State Police make any effort not to record incoming calls from attorneys to their clients.

It was known by the State Police when these recording systems were installed, and at all subsequent times, that they recorded both incoming and outgoing calls; that they recorded specific telephone lines (onto which calls from all telephone handsets were routed automatically) rather than specific telephone handsets; and that there existed no unrecorded lines dedicated for use by detainees, arrestees or suspects.

888 F. Supp. at 1244 (emphases added).

Though the recorders used in the early years of the pertinent period used "beep tones" to alert call participants that their conversations were being recorded, "[b]y 1986 . . . some recorded lines did not have beep tones." Id. at 1243. Although defendants asserted that the public was also on notice as to the recording practice because of statements in local area telephone books that calls to police, fire, and other emergency facilities could be recorded, the district court noted that this alert did not mention calls made from, rather than to, such facilities.

In 1983, the Connecticut Supreme Court decided State v. Ferrell


02 VersusLaw, Inc.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.