Michael J. Palagonia

Badge #20716, White Male
Police Officer at 105th Precinct since October 2020
Service started July 2019, made $116,000 last year, Tax #968053

Substantiated Allegations:
Discourtesy: Word (2)
Offensive Language: Gender

Lawsuit Settlements:
$97,500   Mitchell, Scarlet vs City of New York, et al., EDNY EDNY 22CV07437
View Details

Complaints

4 Complaints
9 Allegations
3 Substantiated
1 Substantiated (Charges)
2 Substantiated (Command Discipline A)
3 Complaint Withdrawn
1 Exonerated
2 Within NYPD Guidelines

Complaint #202605588, May 2026
Allegation: Force: Physical force
Complainant: Male, 60-64
CCRB Conclusion: Complaint Withdrawn
Allegation: Abuse of Authority: Entry of Premises
Complainant: Male, 60-64
CCRB Conclusion: Complaint Withdrawn
Allegation: Abuse of Authority: Forcible Removal to Hospital
Complainant: Male, 60-64
CCRB Conclusion: Complaint Withdrawn
additional details

Complaint #202406189, June 2024
Allegation: Abuse of Authority: Threat of force (verbal or physical)
Complainant: Black Male, 10-14
CCRB Conclusion: Within NYPD Guidelines
Allegation: Discourtesy: Word
Complainant: Black Male, 10-14
CCRB Conclusion: Within NYPD Guidelines
Allegation: Discourtesy: Word
Complainant: Black Male, 10-14
CCRB Conclusion: Substantiated (Command Discipline A)
Allegation: Offensive Language: Gender
Complainant: Black Male, 10-14
CCRB Conclusion: Substantiated (Charges)
APU Case Status: Pending
Penalty: APU - Decision Pending
additional details

Complaint #202402001, February 2024
Allegation: Discourtesy: Word
Complainant: Black Male, 21-24
CCRB Conclusion: Substantiated (Command Discipline A)
Penalty: Command Discipline - A
additional details

Complaint #202102489, April 2021
Allegation: Force: Physical force
Complainant: Black Female, 70-74
CCRB Conclusion: Exonerated
additional details

Complaint #202605588, May 2026
Allegation Complainant CCRB Conclusion
Force: Physical force Male, 60-64 Complaint Withdrawn
Abuse of Authority: Entry of Premises Male, 60-64 Complaint Withdrawn
Abuse of Authority: Forcible Removal to Hospital Male, 60-64 Complaint Withdrawn
additional details
Complaint #202406189, June 2024
Allegation Complainant CCRB Conclusion
Abuse of Authority: Threat of force (verbal or physical) Black Male, 10-14 Within NYPD Guidelines
Discourtesy: Word Black Male, 10-14 Within NYPD Guidelines
Discourtesy: Word Black Male, 10-14 Substantiated (Command Discipline A)
Offensive Language: Gender Black Male, 10-14 Substantiated (Charges)
APU Case Status: Pending
Penalty: APU - Decision Pending
additional details
Complaint #202402001, February 2024
Allegation Complainant CCRB Conclusion
Discourtesy: Word Black Male, 21-24 Substantiated (Command Discipline A)
Penalty: Command Discipline - A
additional details
Complaint #202102489, April 2021
Allegation Complainant CCRB Conclusion
Force: Physical force Black Female, 70-74 Exonerated
additional details

Conclusion Meanings:

'Exonerated': or 'Within NYPD Guidelines' - The conduct occurred but did not violate the NYPD's own rules, which often give officers significant discretion.
'Substantiated': The misconduct occurred and it violated the rules. The NYPD has discretion over what, if any, discipline is imposed.
'Within NYPD Guidelines': The conduct occurred but did not violate the NYPD's own rules, which often give officers significant discretion.

Further details on conclusions.


Lawsuits

Named in 2 known lawsuits, $97,500 total settlements.

James, Egobeda vs City of Ny, et al.
Case # 718489/2024, Supreme Court - Queens, January 2, 2025

Mitchell, Scarlet vs City of New York, et al.
Case # 22CV07437, U.S. District Court - Eastern District NY
$97,500 Settlement
Complaint
Description: On September 8, 2021, plaintiff, SCARLET MITCHELL, a domestic violence victim, was without cause or justification, unlawfully and unreasonably arrested by defendant NYPD officers, LAUREN LUCIANO, JOSE GUTIERREZ, CHRISTOPHER DOUSE, and MICHAEL PALAGONIA, for possession of the firearm that she herself had been assaulted and threatened with by her then boyfriend. Despite plaintiff’s claim that she was victim, her reports of injuries, and that defendants possessed information from dispatch via the multiple 911 calls that had been made that plaintiff was the victim, all of which confirmed there was a reason to doubt that the gun belonged to plaintiff, defendants conducted no further investigation, including making e...