Pirozzi v. City of New York

Second Circuit

Pirozzi v. City of New York

117 F.3d 722, 1997 WL 424454

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit·Decided July 30, 1997·No. No. 1773, Docket 96-9689·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

John Pirozzi and Frank Rotundi appeal from Judge Scheindlin’s adverse grant of summary judgment in their action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The appellants, New York City Police Officers, allege that the release of their testimony before the New York City Police Department Civilian Complaint Review Board to the Kings County District Attorney violated both their Fifth Amendment right against compelled self-incrimination and their Fourteenth Amendment right to due process of law. We affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Pirozzi v. City of New York, 950 F.Supp. 90 (S.D.N.Y.1996).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM:

John Pirozzi and Frank Rotundi appeal from Judge Scheindlin’s adverse grant of summary judgment in their action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The appellants, New York City Police Officers, allege that the release of their testimony before the New York City Police Department Civilian Complaint Review Board to the Kings County District Attorney violated both their Fifth Amendment right against compelled self-incrimination and their Fourteenth Amendment right to due process of law. We affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Pirozzi v. City of New York, 950 F.Supp. 90 (S.D.N.Y.1996).

Pirozzi v. City of New York, 117 F.3d 722, 1997 WL 424454 (2d Cir. 1997).

Pincite

117 F.3d 722 (Pirozzi v. City of New York) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related