Evelyn v. Rantab Enterprises Incorporated

Background

The complaint names an unidentified Mount Sinai hospital administrator or employee and unidentified New York City police officers. Mount Sinai Morningside reported that it had not been able to identify the hospital administrator and determined that the administrator on duty was male. The City of New York likewise reported that it had not yet identified the officers and was reviewing dispatch chronology records.

Royce Corley, appearing without a lawyer, filed a “Pre-Trial Omnibus Motion.” He argued that the officers could be identified from information in the complaint and provided additional information about the hospital administrator. He also sought relief on behalf of Rochelle Evelyn. The Mount Sinai Defendants—Mount Sinai Morningside, Anjali Singh, M.D., and Christina Liu, M.D.—filed a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6), which asks whether a complaint states a legally sufficient claim. The court did not decide that motion in this order.

Court’s Orders

Identification of the hospital administrator. Under its court-assisted procedure for helping a plaintiff identify an unnamed defendant, the court ordered Mount Sinai Morningside to conduct an additional 60 days of investigation. The investigation must use the information Corley provided and must concern any unnamed administrator or employee who was directly involved in supervising the identified medical personnel and could have taken the actions described in the complaint, regardless of the person’s gender. Mount Sinai Morningside must file a letter by October 4, 2024, describing its efforts and any information uncovered. If no identity is confirmed by then, Mount Sinai Morningside may request dismissal of the claims against the administrator. The court did not dismiss those claims in this order.

Corley’s motion. The court denied all remaining relief sought in Corley’s motion as frivolous, not ripe for decision, or moot. It separately denied all relief Corley sought “on behalf of” Evelyn for lack of standing, explaining that a person appearing without a lawyer may represent only that person’s own interests. The court stated that Evelyn may seek relief on her own behalf. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate Docket No. 33.

Medical releases and the City’s response. The court reaffirmed its prior order requiring the plaintiffs to provide the City with complete and fully executed medical releases. The new deadline was August 23, 2024. If the City had not received the releases by August 26, 2024, it was ordered to notify the court and request dismissal for failure to prosecute. The court stated that it would most likely grant such a request. The City’s deadline to respond to the complaint was stayed while this issue was pending.

Pending dismissal motion and service. Further briefing on the Mount Sinai Defendants’ motion to dismiss was stayed until the matters above were resolved. The court said it would set a later briefing schedule if necessary. The dispute over service on Christina Liu, M.D., who had not yet been served, was also held in abeyance pending resolution of the dismissal motion.

Disposition and classification

This was a procedural order. The court issued investigation and discovery-related directions, denied portions of Corley’s motion, set compliance deadlines, and postponed consideration of the pending motion to dismiss. It did not decide the merits of the claims or the motion to dismiss.