Madero v. McGuinness

Dist. Ct. did not err in granting defendant-police officer’s motion for summary judgment in plaintiff’s section 1983 action, alleging that defendant subjected him to false arrest, in incident during which defendant arrived at accident scene where defendant arrested plaintiff after three witnesses accused plaintiff of being involved in hit-and-run accident and of physically battering another individual. Plaintiff could not prevail in his false arrest claim because defendant had probable cause to arrest plaintiff based on three witnesses’ statements that defendant was culprit. Defendant could believe said witnesses, and was not required to exhaust all other investigative avenues in hopes of uncovering potentially exculpatory evidence.