Superior Court Judge Accuses Woodbridge Police of Malicious Prosecution in Her Arrest
The lawsuit comes after the underlying charges were thrown out or dismissed.
September 12, 2019 at 05:31 PM
7 minute read
Superior Court Judge Carlia Brady has filed a malicious prosecution suit in federal court over what she calls a "five-year nightmare" that followed her arrest by Woodbridge police on a charge of hindering apprehension of her former boyfriend.
Brady claims she was falsely arrested for failing to call police when Jason Prontnicki, who was then a fugitive, was in her presence. Woodbridge police allegedly fabricated evidence and maliciously prosecuted her for offenses she did not commit and had no duty to report, based on racial animus, racial profiling and gender bias, the suit claims. Brady is an Asian-American who was born in the Philippines.
A charge of official misconduct against Brady was thrown out in 2016 after a judge ruled prosecutors failed to show her attempts to notify police of her ex-boyfriend's whereabouts were insufficient. The Appellate Division affirmed that ruling in 2017.
Brady was cleared in 2018 when the two remaining counts of hindering apprehension were dismissed at the request of the Somerset County Prosecutor's Office just as a jury was being selected. The charges were withdrawn after the Appellate Division ruled that Prontnicki, the only prosecution witness, could not be compelled to testify against Brady.
The lawsuit filed Wednesday names the township of Woodbridge, Police Director Robert Hubner, Lt. Brian Murphy, Detective Sean Grogan, Sgt. Walter Bukowski, officer Robert Bartko and Lt. James Mullarney as defendants.
According to Brady's suit, Prontnicki moved in with her a few months before she became a judge in April 2013. Brady said she did not know he had an addiction to painkillers and had pleaded guilty to using a false prescription to obtain opioids. Brady also said she didn't know Prontnicki had outstanding warrants for armed robbery, unlawful possession of a weapon and careless driving. One of the warrants stemmed from an incident in which he allegedly threatened an Old Bridge pharmacist with a crowbar and demanded drugs.
Brady's interactions with Woodbridge police began when Prontnicki borrowed her Honda Civic and subsequently loaned it to a friend, who did not return it. On June 9, 2013, when Prontnicki told Brady he had given someone her car, she broke off the relationship and asked him to move out. She went to the Woodbridge police the next day to report her car stolen, and was "met with suspicion and treated as a criminal rather than the victim," the lawsuit claims.
Woodbridge officers took Brady to an interrogation room and questioned her about Prontnicki's drug usage. The officers tried to persuade her to file a stolen car report, but she questioned whether she could do that because she had given Prontnicki permission to use the car.
After two hours of questioning, Brady stood up to leave, but the officers blocked her exit and told her about the outstanding Old Bridge arrest warrant. They told her she had an affirmative duty as a judge to report his whereabouts to police if he should return to her home, the suit said. No such duty exists.
Soon after leaving the police department, Brady received a phone call from Prontnicki, who said he located her car and was returning it. She told him he had an arrest warrant and should not come to her home. A short time later, Prontnicki came to Brady's home, pushing his way past her father, who answered the door.
Brady said she was afraid to call police because she feared for the safety of her elderly parents, who were at her home, and believed Prontnicki might be armed. She asked him to leave, but he refused and insisted on apologizing for giving away her car and denying involvement in the pharmacy robbery. He left after about 90 minutes when his brother picked him up.
"As soon as defendants realized Judge Brady was a sitting judge in Middlesex County, who was involved with a drug addicted wanted fugitive, they immediately set their sights on her. Their sole purpose, as demonstrated by their failure to perform their law enforcement duties to apprehend Prontnicki, was to snare a judge," the suit claims.
Brady then called a Woodbridge detective and left him a voice mail to report that Prontnicki had just left her house. However, the transcript of the voice mail admitted in to evidence deleted some of her statements, and the officers destroyed the original voice mail, the lawsuit said. She left another voice mail message the next day, the suit claims.
Prontnicki came to Brady's house with his brother the next day, where his arrival was noted by two Woodbridge officers conducting surveillance, the suit says. Prontnicki called Brady to say he came to retrieve his belongings, then entered the house through the garage. He left with a duffel bag full of clothing and drove off, and was arrested by Woodbridge police two blocks away.
Prontnicki is serving an eight-year sentence for robbery at East Jersey State Prison.
As soon as Prontnicki was arrested, the officers entered Brady's home without a warrant and placed her under arrest without advising her of her Miranda rights, the suit claims. She was shackled to a wall at police headquarters, then placed in a holding cell with other prisoners before being released.
The suit says two Woodbridge officers and an assistant prosecutor from Middlesex County went to the residence of Middlesex County Presiding Criminal Judge Bradley Ferencz, seeking the issuance of a criminal complaint-warrant. The suit says Ferencz expressed skepticism that probable cause existed for such a complaint-warrant, prompting then-Middlesex County Prosecutor Andrew Carey to call Ferencz.
Carey told Ferencz that failure to call police while in the presence of someone with an arrest warrant for a violent crime is a violation of the hindering statute. But Carey knew there was no such crime in New Jersey, the lawsuit claims.
Carey is now with the U.S. Attorney's Office, where a spokesman did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The suit says the Woodbridge Police Department has a long history of aggressive police practices, including falsifying reports, fabricating evidence, sham internal affairs investigations, false arrests, racial profiling and excessive use of force, the suit claims.
The suit brings claims for malicious prosecution, conspiracy to violate Brady's civil rights, negligent training, negligent hiring and retention, race and gender discrimination under 42 U.S.C. §1983 and the Fourteenth Amendment, conspiracy with racial animus, negligent and intentional infliction of emotional distress, and violation of the New Jersey Civil Rights Act. Brady seeks actual, general and punitive damages as well as attorney fees and costs.
Brady is represented by Tracey Hinson of Hinson Snipes in Princeton, who said of the police department, "From the very beginning, they targeted her. They need to explain the premise behind the reason they arrested her."
Woodbridge Mayor John McCormac's spokesman, John Hagerty, said the suit was "under review" but he was "not in a position to comment" other than to say the township would "vigorously defend it."
Hubner, the Woodbridge police director did respond to a request for comment.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllRetiring AOC Director Judge Glenn A. Grant Walks Away From Judiciary 'Tremendously Impressed' by New Jersey's Judges
5 minute readFederal Judge Pauses Trump Funding Freeze as Democratic AGs Plan Suit
4 minute read‘The Decision Will Help Others’: NJ Supreme Court Reverses Appellate Div. in OPRA Claim Over Body-Worn Camera Footage
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Law Firms Expand Scope of Immigration Expertise, Amid Blitz of Trump Orders
- 2Latest Boutique Combination in Florida Continues Am Law 200 Merger Activity
- 3Sarno da Costa D’Aniello Maceri LLC Announces Addition of New Office in Eatontown, NJ, and Named Partner
- 4Friday Newspaper
- 5Public Notices/Calendars
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250