Not so big jury verdict? A better deal

Oddly, also in today’s Daily News is this, about another smaller jury verdict which I bet will hold up:

59G award for brutal cop ‘collar’

A Queens woman was awarded $59,000 in damages by a federal jury that found NYPD cops used excessive force in arresting her in November, 2010 for not cleaning up after her dog in Rockaway.

Anna Stanczyk, 51, had argued that her dog, named Prankster, had merely tinkled, and when cops demanded her identification, it was on.

The jury rejected the testimony of Officers Richard DiMartino and Shaun Grossweiler, who denied they beat the woman black and blue. They claimed Stanczyk fell when they struggled to cuff her.

The jury determined DiMartino punched her, and Grosweiler closed the car door on her body.

The cops, who were cleared of civil false arrest charges, declined to comment on the verdict.

“We’re very grateful the jury saw the truth of what happened that day, but we’re deeply disappointed with the amount of the damages,” said Stanczyk’s lawyer, Jon Norinsberg.

City Attorney Andrew Wenzel said: “We appreciate the jury weighing the matter although we’re disappointed that it decided against the city. — John Marzulli.

So everybody’s disappointed. Maybe both lawyers should read the piece, below, about Carlos Pacheco. Then they’d both feel better.

Plaintiff’s lawyer: Jon Norinsberg


This entry was posted in Law, suits and order. Bookmark the permalink.