The following excerpt is from Murphy v. Lynn, 118 F.3d 938 (2nd Cir. 1997):
To the extent pertinent to this case, the Fourth Amendment protects against unreasonable "seizures." It is established that an unreasonable seizure by a state actor in violation of the Fourth Amendment may be pursued in a suit brought under 1983. See, e.g., Brower v. County of Inyo, 489 U.S. 593, 596, 109 S.Ct. 1378, 1381, 103 L.Ed.2d 628 (1989). Further, since the gist of a claim for malicious prosecution is abuse of the judicial process, a plaintiff pursuing such a claim under 1983 must show that the seizure resulted from the initiation or pendency of judicial proceedings.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.