Judge Brian Cogan
Cruz’s 42 USC §1983 action asserted that he was held in the district attorney’s office from Feb. 22, until Feb. 27 or 28, 2010, without food, water, or use of a bathroom. However, Cruz testified at deposition that during the subject period, he was repeatedly given water, access to a bathroom, and that for the relatively brief period of time he was in the district attorney’s office on Feb. 22 and 23, he never asked for any food. Unimpeached police department business records—most importantly a “court pen log book”—reflected that Cruz was at Central Booking from Feb. 23 through 25, with a brief return of some four hours back to the district attorney’s office. Cruz’s own testimony also showed that after arraignment on Feb. 25, he was taken to Rikers Island. Discussing Scott v. Harris, Rojas v. Roman Catholic Diocese of Rochester and Jeffreys v. City of New York, the court granted defendants summary judgment, finding Cruz’s version of the events to be both self-contradicted and documentary evidence-contradicted. Scott illustrates that just because a party opposing summary judgment submits a sworn statement giving his version of the events, a factual issue will not be deemed to exist if other evidence shows that the statement cannot be credited.
