S.P. v. Newark Police Department
52 A.3d 178, 428 N.J. Super. 210, 2012 WL 4448748 (2012)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A police officer's determination of whether a domestic violence relationship exists and whether a victim exhibits signs of injury under the Prevention of Domestic Violence Act (PDVA) is a discretionary act, not a ministerial one. Therefore, the failure to make an arrest under such circumstances is shielded by the immunity provisions of the Tort Claims Act (TCA).
Facts:
- S.P. and Louis Alfredo Santiago, Jr. were residents of the same boarding house in Newark, living in separate rooms on the same floor and sharing a bathroom and kitchen.
- Shortly after midnight on February 17, 2008, Santiago approached S.P. in their shared hallway, grabbed her breast and buttocks over her clothes, and stated his desire to have sex with her.
- S.P. repelled Santiago, locked herself in her bedroom, and called the police as Santiago tried to open her door.
- Newark police officers Bernal and Ellison responded to the scene. S.P. informed them of the groping, the sexual proposition, and Santiago's attempts to enter her room.
- The officers spoke with Santiago, who admitted to drinking, touching S.P., and trying to get into her room.
- The officers warned Santiago to stay away from S.P. but did not arrest him.
- The following morning, as S.P. exited the shared bathroom, Santiago attacked her, punching her in the face, choking her, and raping her in the hallway.
Procedural Posture:
- S.P. filed a civil suit against the City of Newark in a state trial court, alleging negligence for its officers' failure to arrest Santiago.
- The City of Newark filed a motion for summary judgment, asserting absolute immunity under the New Jersey Tort Claims Act.
- The trial court judge denied the City's motion, finding that S.P. and Santiago were 'household members' under the PDVA and that material factual issues remained.
- The City of Newark was granted leave to file an interlocutory appeal to the Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division, challenging the trial court's denial of summary judgment.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does the Prevention of Domestic Violence Act (PDVA) impose a ministerial duty on police officers to arrest an alleged attacker, thereby creating an exception to the general immunity for failure to arrest provided by the Tort Claims Act (TCA), when the officers determine the parties are not in a domestic violence relationship and the victim exhibits no visible signs of injury?
Opinions:
Majority - Axelrad, P.J.A.D.
No. The Prevention of Domestic Violence Act (PDVA) does not create a ministerial duty to arrest under these circumstances, and thus does not override the immunity granted by the Tort Claims Act (TCA). The guiding principle of the TCA is that sovereign immunity is the rule and liability is the exception. While the court agreed that S.P. and Santiago could be considered 'household members' under the PDVA’s liberal interpretation, the ultimate decision to arrest was not ministerial. A ministerial duty is one performed without the exercise of judgment. Here, the officers were required to exercise discretion in determining both whether a qualifying domestic violence relationship existed—which was not obvious—and whether S.P. 'exhibited signs of injury,' which requires an assessment beyond visible marks. Because these determinations involved judgment, the officers' actions were discretionary. Consequently, the specific TCA immunities for discretionary acts and for the failure to make an arrest protect the City of Newark from civil liability.
Analysis:
This decision reinforces the high threshold required to overcome the broad immunities provided by the Tort Claims Act. By classifying an officer's threshold determinations under the PDVA (such as identifying a qualifying relationship and signs of injury) as discretionary, the court significantly narrows the circumstances under which a public entity can be held liable for a failure to arrest. This precedent makes it more difficult for plaintiffs to sue for negligence in domestic violence scenarios unless the statutory grounds for a mandatory, ministerial duty to arrest are unequivocally met. The ruling emphasizes that when TCA immunity conflicts with potential liability under another statute, immunity is paramount.
