Febrianti v. NYC Health & Hospitals

Background

Erica Febrianti brings a self-represented lawsuit under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, and the New York State and New York City Human Rights Laws. She alleges discrimination based on religion, sex, and age. The court had previously allowed her to proceed without paying filing fees. On January 6, 2025, she filed an amended complaint adding the New York City Police Department (NYPD) as a defendant.

Screening standard

Because Febrianti was allowed to proceed without prepaying fees, the court was required to screen the amended complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). That statute requires dismissal of claims that are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a legally sufficient claim, or seek money from an immune defendant. The court also must dismiss a case when it lacks subject-matter jurisdiction. The court stated that it must read a self-represented litigant’s allegations liberally and interpret them to present the strongest claims they reasonably suggest.

Claims involving the NYPD

The court explained that the New York City Charter requires actions against city agencies to be brought in the name of the City of New York unless a law provides otherwise. Relying on Second Circuit precedent, the court stated that the NYPD is an organizational subdivision of New York City and has no independent legal existence, so it cannot be sued as a separate entity.

The court therefore dismissed Febrianti’s claims against the NYPD under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). Because Febrianti is representing herself, the court construed the amended complaint as asserting claims against the City of New York and directed the clerk to replace the NYPD with the City in the case caption. The court stated that this amendment was without prejudice to any defenses the City may later assert.

Service on New York City

The court stated that a person allowed to proceed without prepaying fees may rely on the court and the U.S. Marshals Service to serve process. It directed the clerk to prepare a U.S. Marshals Service process form for the City, issue a summons, and provide the Marshals Service with the documents needed to serve the City, including the amended complaint.

The order states that if the amended complaint is not served within 90 days after the summons issues, Febrianti should ask for an extension of time. It also requires her to notify the court in writing if her address changes and states that the court may dismiss the action if she fails to do so.

Disposition

Judge Jennifer L. Rochon’s order dismisses Febrianti’s claims against the NYPD, directs the clerk to add the City of New York as a defendant under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 21, and directs issuance and service of the summons and related papers on the City.