Law Enforcement and Administrative Functions (Part 1)

by | Jan 18, 2021 | Blog, Criminal Law, Monmouth County, New Jersey, Ocean County

Sexual Offense

On July 28, 2020, the New Jersey Supreme Court decided the Monmouth County case of Christopher J. Gramiccioni v. Department of Law and Public Safety. This case dealt with the standards for holding prosecutors and other members of law enforcement civilly liable with regard to actions that touch upon their official employment functions. A case involving a local police officer that killed his wife after his firearm was returned to him with the knowledge of local law enforcement officials was the basis for the case.

Justice LaVecchia wrote for a unanimous New Jersey Supreme Court in relevant part: In these consolidated appeals, the Court examines whether the Department of Law and Public Safety’s (Department) four final agency determinations regarding defense and indemnification for federal civil rights claims filed against the Monmouth County Prosecutor’s Office and its employees were in keeping with Wright v. State, 169 N.J. 422 (2001). This case stems from the 2015 murder of Tamara Wilson-Seidle by her ex-husband, Philip Seidle, an off-duty sergeant with the Neptune Township Police Department, using his service weapon. Wilson-Seidle’s estate and survivors filed a complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in federal court, naming several defendants, including the Monmouth County Prosecutor’s Office (MCPO) and Monmouth County Prosecutor Christopher Gramiccioni, and an amended pleading that added as defendants three former MCPO assistant prosecutors.

The Complaint alleged that defendants were aware of Seidle’s history of domestic violence and brought claims for damages based on assertions that defendants knew Seidle was unfit for duty, failed to properly investigate Wilson-Seidle’s domestic abuse complaints, improperly returned Seidle’s weapon to him, and failed to seize it when it should have been taken from him. Because the domestic violence that gave rise to this matter involved a law enforcement officer, the MCPO defendants were subject to certain duties pursuant to Attorney General Law Enforcement Directive No. 2000-3 (the Directive).

The Seidle family’s attorney’s knowledge of what constituted an administrative function would have been crucial to pursuing the best strategy in the underlying civil case. Creating a dynamic wherein the defendant faces financial ruin is a key to maximizing recovery. Without indemnification from the Attorney General’s Office via New Jersey taxpayers, there is a chance that the individual defendants would not have the assets to pay the potential damages.

Excellent rating
Based on 288 reviews
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Mr. Sisto and his entire staff were courteous, professional and got our case handled quickly and to the best outcome. Great lawyer. Highly recommend.
Bryan B
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
I got my life back together because of this man he is quick,strategic,and will get you threw almost any criminal matter.When things are looking rough legal wise he will fight for you…FRED SISTO THE WAY TO GO!!!
Byron P
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Worst Attorney I have ever encountered he will WASTE your time and steal your MONEY. Don't RECOMMEND!
Patric W
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Very knowledgeable with expungement!!! Thanks again!!!
Nicole B
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Professional, knowledgeable and responsive. I would highly recommend Fritz to any friend or family members.
William S
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Nice to know where to avoid,I drive a taxi and can save time if I know where they are because they tie up traffic.
John M
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Fred is a good lawyer, he is really young yet made me feel confident that my lawful rights were being protected, and investigated all avenues when there was potential they weren't. He is very knowledgeable, and offered great peace of mind in such a distressing situation. I always felt like he had my back throughout the whole process, supporting aspects to my case that didn't even fall within his scope. I would highly recommend Fred.
Amy L
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Mr Sisto is an excellent lawyer. The tickets I received were nothing compared to the charges i had originally. I got the best possible outcome for my case, and Mr Sisto was incredibly understanding and patient and responded to any questions I had within about 30 minutes of me asking them. I'll be going to him again for any legal trouble I have in the future
Brandon K
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Fred Sisto is an excellent attorney who works diligently and thoroughly to support, advise, and guide you through your legal difficulties. He is down-to-earth, advises you well, and his cost is comparable and well-worth it based on the service and expertise that he provides. Fred was able to get me the best possible outcome for my situation based on the possibilities and he was direct and honest with me throughout the process. John McDonnell
John M
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Fred Sisto is amazing!! Definitely recommend
Jen A