and Croneiser, leading to the false arrest of Mr. Hogan and the ensuing abuse of process. See Suppl. Compl. ¶¶ 83-93. “[T]o prevail on a claim against a municipality under Section 1983 based on acts of a public official, a plaintiff is required to prove: (1) actions taken under color of law; (2) deprivation of a constitutional or statutory right; (3) causation; (4) damages; and (5) that an official policy of the municipality caused the constitutional injury.” Roe v. City of Waterbury, 542 F.3d 31, 36 (2d Cir.2008). Because the Court grants the Lewis County Defendants’ Motion for summary judgment against the individual Lewis County Defendants on the § 1983 false arrest and abuse-of-process claims, Plaintiffs have no basis to assert municipal liability. See Escalera, 361 F.3d at 749 (<HOLDING>). Therefore, the Court grants the Lewis County
holding that the defendants were entitled to qualified immunity where the plaintiff failed to demonstrate that speech was public concern holding county clerk sued in official capacity was entitled to the immunity the county enjoyed holding that suit against county sheriff in his official capacity was suit against county holding that a county was entitled to summary judgment where the claims against the individual defendants had failed holding summary judgment appropriate where plaintiff failed to establish product identification