Sealed, Recanted, Terminated: Former NYPD Officer Sues Over Career-Ending Discipline

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Lawsuit alleges NYPD used dismissed and sealed criminal allegations, recanted statements, and gender-based domestic-violence stereotypes to terminate him.

New York, N.Y. — May 24, 2026 — Eric Sanders, Esq., of The Sanders Firm, P.C. announced today that it has filed a civil-rights action on behalf of former New York City Police Officer AMRIT P. SINGH against THE CITY OF NEW YORK, JESSICA S. TISCH, JEFF S. ADLER, and CHRISTINE M. MALONEY, alleging that defendants unlawfully used dismissed and sealed criminal allegations, recanted domestic-related accusation materials, and gender-based domestic-violence stereotypes to terminate him from the New York City Police Department.

The complaint alleges that AMRIT P. SINGH was arrested on September 12, 2023, following domestic-related allegations. The Queens Criminal Court later dismissed the criminal matter on January 30, 2024, on speedy-trial grounds pursuant to CPL § 170.30(1)(e), and the matter was sealed pursuant to CPL § 160.50. Despite that dismissal and sealing, the lawsuit alleges that NYPD officials continued to rely on the same accusation materials as the foundation for disciplinary prosecution, adverse credibility findings, termination recommendation, and final dismissal.

“This case is about whether the NYPD can take a dismissed and sealed criminal case, dress it up as internal discipline, and use it to destroy a police officer’s career,” said Eric Sanders, founder and president of The Sanders Firm, P.C. “New York sealing law exists for a reason. A dismissed criminal accusation is not supposed to become a permanent employment disability. The Department cannot evade CPL § 160.50 by moving the same accusation file into an internal disciplinary proceeding and calling it something else.”

According to the complaint, the NYPD disciplinary case was prosecuted by defendant CHRISTINE M. MALONEY, adjudicated by defendant JEFF S. ADLER, and ultimately adopted by defendant JESSICA S. TISCH, who dismissed SINGH from the Police Department City of New York. The lawsuit alleges that the disciplinary process relied heavily on pretrial accusation materials, including domestic-incident records, 911-related materials, recorded interviews, prior witness statements, and related evidence generated from the domestic-related accusation record.

The complaint further alleges that the Department’s own disciplinary record reflected material recantation evidence from the principal complainant and other family witnesses. The lawsuit does not claim that recantation automatically controls every domestic-violence-related proceeding. Rather, it alleges that recantation is a serious evidentiary warning requiring caution, corroboration, reliability assessment, and lawful proof. In SINGH’s case, the lawsuit alleges defendants treated the recantation evidence as an obstacle to be overcome by institutional preference for the original accusation narrative.

The action also challenges what the complaint describes as gender-based domestic-violence stereotyping. SINGH alleges that defendants treated him, a male police officer involved in a domestic-related family dispute, as the presumptive aggressor; discounted his defensive account; and failed to meaningfully consider his actual or perceived status as a victim of domestic violence or defensive actor.

The complaint also places the case within a broader NYPD disciplinary context. It alleges that the Department has retained members of service accused of serious misconduct, including criminal or potentially criminal conduct, while imposing termination on SINGH after dismissal, sealing, recantation, and disputed accusation evidence. The lawsuit seeks comparator discovery concerning prior disciplinary matters, negotiated settlements, penalty recommendations, final Police Commissioner decisions, dismissal-probation dispositions, and cases in which members accused of serious misconduct remained employed.

“The Department cannot preach transparency while hiding the very settlement and comparator data needed to test whether discipline is being applied fairly,” Sanders said. “If officers accused of serious misconduct, payroll abuse, firearm misconduct, false statements, or other criminal conduct are allowed to keep their jobs through negotiated resolutions, the public has a right to know why SINGH was terminated on a dismissed, sealed, and recanted accusation record.”

The lawsuit asserts claims under the New York State Human Rights Law and, where applicable, the New York City Human Rights Law, including arrest-history discrimination, gender discrimination, discrimination based upon actual or perceived status as a victim of domestic violence, and retaliation. The complaint seeks compensatory damages, economic damages, emotional-distress damages, punitive damages where legally available, declaratory and injunctive relief, reinstatement or front pay where appropriate, correction or expungement of unlawful records, attorneys’ fees, costs, and all other relief permitted by law.

“This case is not an ordinary disagreement with discipline,” Sanders said. “It challenges an unlawful evidentiary pathway: dismissed and sealed criminal allegations, recanted domestic-related claims, gendered assumptions, and a disciplinary system that appears to protect favored insiders while imposing career-ending penalties on others.”

About The Sanders Firm, P.C.

The Sanders Firm, P.C. is a New York-based law firm focused on civil rights, immigration, employment discrimination, police misconduct, and other high-stakes matters. Its founder and president, Eric Sanders, Esq., is a retired NYPD officer who brings a rare inside perspective to the intersection of government power, public institutions, enforcement discretion, and constitutional accountability.

For more than twenty years, Sanders has counseled thousands of clients and handled complex matters involving police use of force, sexual harassment, retaliation, systemic discrimination, immigration consequences, and related civil-rights violations. He is widely recognized as a leading New York civil-rights attorney and a prominent voice on evidence-based policing, institutional accountability, equal justice, and rights-based immigration advocacy.

Media Contact