Hickman v. The City of New York

Background

Quandel Hickman, who is incarcerated at the Otis Bantum Correctional Center on Rikers Island, filed the action without a lawyer. He alleged that on February 2, 2024, at the intake unit of the Eric M. Taylor Center, Captain Wells and other intake staff attacked him, wrestled him to the ground, touched and searched him, and searched for a memory card. He also alleged that staff took an iPhone, a MacBook Pro, a Gucci book bag, loafers, and SIM cards; that he was threatened when he requested medical care; that he suffered a panic attack or seizure; and that he later received inadequate medical care for injuries connected to handcuffs. He further alleged that correctional staff accused him of being under the influence of drugs, although he said a drug test was negative, and issued him a ticket after he made a 311 complaint.

Hickman sued the New York City Department of Correction, Captain Wells, and approximately eleven correction officers. The opinion noted that the identities and number of some defendants were unclear, including the references to “3 ESU officers” and two defendants identified as “ESU Castello.” Hickman sought one billion dollars in damages and an order requiring the defendants to be fired and arrested.

Screening standard

The court reviewed the prisoner complaint under the Prison Litigation Reform Act. That law requires screening and dismissal of claims that are frivolous or malicious, fail to state a claim for relief, seek money from an immune defendant, or fall outside the court’s subject-matter jurisdiction. Although courts read complaints filed without a lawyer generously, the complaint still must provide enough facts to make the claimed legal violation plausible and must meet the requirement of a short and plain statement of the facts supporting relief.

Personal involvement

For a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege facts showing each defendant’s direct and personal involvement in the alleged constitutional violation. The court concluded that Hickman named approximately a dozen individual defendants but did not clearly explain what any particular defendant did or failed to do. The court specifically noted that Correction Officers Charles and Studwood appeared in the caption but were not mentioned in the complaint’s factual allegations. The court therefore dismissed Hickman’s claims for failure to state a claim on which relief could be granted.

Department of Correction

The court ruled that the New York City Department of Correction, as a city agency, is not an entity that can be sued separately. It stated that any amended claim concerning the Department must instead be brought against the City of New York. To state a § 1983 claim against the City, Hickman would need to allege facts showing both a city policy, custom, or practice and that the policy, custom, or practice caused the alleged constitutional violation. Alleging wrongdoing by a city employee alone would not be enough.

Leave to amend and disposition

Because the court determined that Hickman might be able to provide additional facts supporting claims such as deliberate indifference to serious medical needs or an unlawful search, it granted him 60 days to file an amended complaint. The amended complaint must replace, rather than supplement, the original complaint, so Hickman must repeat any facts or claims he wants the court to consider. He must identify the relevant people, describe what each defendant did or failed to do, provide the approximate time and location of the events, describe his injuries, and state the relief sought.

The order granted Hickman leave to file an amended complaint and stated that no summons would issue at that time. If he did not amend within the allowed period and could not show good cause, the court said it would dismiss the federal claims for failure to state a claim and decline supplemental jurisdiction over any state-law claims. The court also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without prepaying fees.

Judge

Chief United States District Judge Laura Taylor Swain signed the order on May 28, 2024.