Toy-Ling Washington v. Township of Hillside City Coun

NOT PRECEDENTIAL
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
____________
No. 10-1711
____________
TOY-LING WASHINGTON, agent for principal Beverly Knight;
N.T., son of plaintiff and minor as applies
v.
TOWNSHIP OF HILLSIDE CITY COUNCIL; JANET VLAISAVLJEVIC, HILLSIDE
CLERK; DWAYNE WARREN; THEODORE ROMANKOW; ANN RUBIN;
HILLSIDE POLICE DEPARTMENT (John Doe Officers); UNION COUNTY
PROSECUTORS OFFICE; DONALD VANARELLI; DAVID NECHAMKIN; CASSEY
KIM; VINCENT GAGLIARDI; THE DEVEREUX FOUNDATION; BRENDA
BRUNISHUIZ; KATHARINE STALKER; HEATHER HANDLON; OWEN
THOMSON; AMERICAN EXPRESS; SUSAN LUBIN; PNC BANK; SIMONE S.
MARTA; WACHOVIA BANK; MULTI CARE NURSING HOME; KATHY NEGRY;
CATHOLIC COMMUNITY SERVICES (UNION COUNTY); YOLANDA
MASSENBERG; YASSHEEDA JOHNSON; PARENTS OF J.G. (minor); ALL
PARTIES AND THEIR AGENTS; UNION COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT
____________
On Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of New Jersey
(D.C. Civil Action No. 06-cv-3102)
District Judge: Honorable Stanley R. Chesler
_____________
Submitted Pursuant to Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a)
September 14, 2010
Before: SLOVITER, CHAGARES and WEIS, Circuit Judges
(Opinion filed: September 21, 2010)
1
___________
OPINION
__________
PER CURIAM.
Toy-Ling Washington appeals the District Court’s orders granting appellee
Union County Sheriff’s Department’s motion for summary judgment and denying her
motion to amend her complaint. The procedural history of this case and the details of
Washington’s claims are well known to the parties, set forth in the District Court’s
thorough opinions, and need not be discussed at length. Briefly, Washington filed a civil
rights complaint against several defendants. The District Court granted several
defendants’ motions to dismiss and subsequently granted Union County Sheriff’s
Department’s motion for summary judgment. Washington filed a timely notice of appeal
challenging the District Court’s order granting the motion for summary judgment and
denying her motion to amend the complaint.
We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We agree with the District
Court that the Union County Sheriff’s Department was entitled to summary judgment on
Washington’s claims of false arrest. An arrest warrant had been issued, and Washington
has not alleged that any of the appellees made false statements with respect to the arrest
warrant. See Wilson v. Russo, 212 F.3d 781, 786-87 (3d Cir. 2000). It appears that the
2
arrest warrant was issued by the judge in Washington’s criminal case after she missed a
hearing. Washington was subsequently convicted of theft by unlawful taking of more
than $75,000 and was sentenced to seven years in prison. See State v. Washington, 975
A.2d 955 (N.J. Super. 2009).
Washington also appeals the District Court’s order denying her motion to
amend her complaint. We review such a denial for an abuse of discretion. Jones v. ABN
Amro Mortg. Group, Inc. 606 F.3d 119, 123 (3d Cir. 2010). The District Court did not
abuse its discretion in denying Washington’s motion to amend her complaint. We lack
jurisdiction over Washington’s challenge to the District Court’s orders remanding a
matter to state court in a separate District Court case.
For the above reasons, we will affirm the District Court’s judgment.
3