In an 80-page ruling, the district court granted summary judgment to Defendants dismissing Bellamy's claims against Detectives Solomeno and Gillen and dismissing the Monell claims on the pleadings. Bellamy v. City of New York , 2017 WL 2189528 (E.D.N.Y. May 17, 2017). First, the district court dismissed Bellamy's malicious prosecution claims against the detectives on the ground that Bellamy failed to raise a triable issue of fact as to whether he was prosecuted without probable cause.Id.

The district court granted defendants' motion for summary judgment because “plaintiff's claims [were] ‘unsubstantiated by any other direct evidence.'” Bellamy v. City of New York, 12 Civ. 1025, 2017 WL 2189528, at *35 (E.D.N.Y. May 17, 2017) (citing Jeffreys, 426 F.3d at 555), aff'd in part, vacated in part, remanded, 914 F.3d 727 (2d Cir. 2019). The Second Circuit vacated the judgment of the district court and stated that “a § 1983 plaintiff's testimony alone may be independently sufficient to raise a genuine issue of material fact.” Bellamy, 914 F.3d at 746 (citing Rentas, 816 F.3d at 221).

Id. at *3; see also Bellamy v. City of New York, No. 12-CIV-1025, 2017 WL 2189528, at *32 (E.D.N.Y. May 17, 2017), aff'd in part, vacated in part on different grounds, 914 F.3d 727 (2d Cir. 2019) (“The detectives did not have their own lawyers at the trial. And, the assistant district attorneys, charged with prosecuting cases on behalf of the People of the State of New York, did not represent either detective, and did not cross-examine Carter with the detectives' interests in mind.”)

(Defs.' Mem. 19 (first citing Lauderdale v. City of New York, No. 15-CV-1486, 2018 WL 1413066, at *8-9 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 19, 2018); then citing Bellamy v. City of New York, 12-CV-1025, 2017 WL 2189528, at *35 (E.D.N.Y. May 17, 2017), aff'd in part and vacated in part, 914 F.3d 727 (2d Cir. 2019); and then citing Greene v. City of New York, No. 08-CV-243, 2017 WL 1030707, at *25 (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 15, 2017), aff'd, 742 F. App'x 532 (2d Cir. 2018)). However, as the Second Circuit reaffirmed when it vacated the portion of Bellamy upon which Defendant relies, "a [section] 1983 plaintiff's testimony alone may be independently sufficient to raise a genuine issue of material fact."

Plaintiffs' position that the remarks were highly prejudicial is "seriously undercut" by Plaintiffs' failure to contemporaneously object to them. See Bellamy v. City of New York, No. 12 Civ. 1025, 2017 WL 2189528, at *41 (E.D.N.Y. May 17, 2017) (internal quotation marks omitted) (quoting Guzman v. Jay, 303 F.R.D. 186, 195 (S.D.N.Y. 2014)). For these reasons, defense counsel's statements do not rise to the level of seriousness that would warrant a new trial.

The "existence of probable cause is a complete defense to a claim of malicious prosecution." Bellamy v. City of N.Y., No. 12-CV-1025 (AMD) (PK), 2017 WL 2189528, at *30-31 (E.D.N.Y. May 17, 2017), appeal filed No. 17-1859 (2d Cir. June 13, 2017) (citing Stansbury v. Wertman, 721 F.3d 84, 94-95 (2d Cir. 2013)); see also Savino v. City of N.Y., 331 F.3d 63, 72 (2d Cir. 2003). In this context, we consider probable cause "in light of facts known or reasonably believed at the time the prosecution was initiated" or continued, and based on whether "facts and circumstances [] would lead a reasonably prudent person to believe the plaintiff guilty."

Van de Kamp v. Goldstein, 555 U.S. 335 (2009) (holding specifically that prosecutors and their supervisors would be absolutely immune from claims alleging the withholding of Brady material). See also Bellamy v. City of New York, No. 12 Civ. 1025, 2017 WL 2189528, at *38-39 (E.D.N.Y. May 17, 2017). Plaintiff does not claim that the prosecutors were involved in the investigation of the crime, and plaintiff does not allege that defendant Golden was involved in withholding the evidence, either in the body of the complaint or in the causes of action.

Excluding that evidence, the only other evidence Plaintiff cites to support his claim that UC 84 misreported the occurrence of events is Plaintiff's own denial and account of the interaction. Plaintiff's claims are "unsubstantiated by any other direct evidence," Jeffreys v. City of N.Y., 426 F.3d 549, 555 (2d Cir. 2005), and therefore insufficient to support his claim, see Fappiano, 640 F. App'x at 118-19 (affirming grant of summary judgment on fair trial claim based on officer's alleged fabrication of information because plaintiff's allegations were speculative and not supported by any evidence); Bellamy v. City of N.Y., No. 12 Civ. 1025 (AMD) (PK), 2017 WL 2189528, at *35 (E.D.N.Y. May 17, 2017) (granting summary judgment on denial of fair trial claim where "[t]he only evidence the plaintiff cites to support his claim that [defendant] lied about what the plaintiff said is his own denial that he made the statements").