The plaintiff, John Kiernan, brought an action in the federal district court, alleging that Hudson Police Officer Dan Dolan engaged in extreme and outrageous conduct that violated Kiernan’s Fourteenth Amendment right to substantive due process. Kiernan also alleged claims for intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligence, abuse of process/malicious prosecution, and defamation.
Kiernan alleged in his complaint that there had been animosity between him and Dolan since 2008, when Dolan testified in a civil suit in which Kiernan was a party. Allegedly, the Hudson Police Department informed Kiernan not to have any contact with Dolan or his wife or he would be arrested. Two years later, Kiernan was involved in a “road-rage” incident with Dolan’s wife, who obtained a restraining order against Kiernan. Kiernan stated that Dolan and his wife then filed additional, false reports with the Nashua Police Department. Then, according to Kiernan, in the summer of 2012, Dolan encountered Kiernan and gave him a “menacing, angry look and blocked an exit so that Kiernan felt he could not leave.
To prove a substantive due process violation, Kiernan was required to overcome a lofty threshold: he must establish that Dolan’s conduct not only “shocked the conscience,” but also deprived Kiernan of life, liberty, or property. The Court held that Kiernan’s allegations fell far short of this threshold and, even if true, would rise to only to the level of “uncivil” or “impolite” behavior. Even if it were true that Dolan and his wife had lied and filed false police reports, that conduct was insufficient to substantive a substantive due process violation.
As a result, the Court dismissed Kiernan’s substantive due process claims as well as his state law claims, declining to exercise jurisdiction over them.