Bien-Aime v. DOCCS

Background

Elijah Blaise Bien-Aime, who is appearing without a lawyer and is incarcerated, brought an action seeking damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, along with claims under state law. He alleged that events giving rise to his claims occurred while he was held in an unspecified New York City Department of Correction jail on Rikers Island. The defendants named in the complaint were “DOCCS”; “6 Building” Rykers Island; Captain Kelly; and three unidentified correction officers, identified as Jane Doe, John Doe 1, and John Doe 2.

The court had previously allowed Bien-Aime to proceed without prepaying filing fees. Because he was a prisoner seeking relief against governmental entities or employees, the court screened the complaint under the Prison Litigation Reform Act. That screening required dismissal of claims that were frivolous, malicious, failed to state a legally sufficient claim, sought money from an immune defendant, or fell outside the court’s jurisdiction.

Rulings

The court dismissed Bien-Aime’s § 1983 claims against “6 Building” Rykers Island for failure to state a claim. Section 1983 requires a plaintiff to allege a violation of a federal right by a person acting under state law. The court ruled that a jail is not a “person” subject to § 1983 liability.

The court also dismissed all claims against “DOCCS.” Although that name ordinarily refers to the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision, the court interpreted it here as referring to the New York City Department of Correction because the alleged events occurred at a Rikers Island jail. The court ruled that the New York City Department of Correction, as a city agency, is not an entity that can be sued separately.

Because the complaint showed a clear intention to assert claims against the City of New York, including claims involving the Rikers Island jail, the court directed the Clerk of Court to replace DOCCS with the City as a defendant under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 21. The court stated that this amendment was without prejudice to any defenses the City might assert.

Service, discovery, and unidentified defendants

The court requested that Captain Kelly and the City waive service of summonses. It also directed them to comply with Local Civil Rule 33.2 by serving responses to specified prisoner-case discovery requests within 120 days of the order.

The court found that the complaint provided enough information for the New York City Department of Correction to identify the three unidentified officers. The information concerned a female officer who allegedly sprayed Bien-Aime with a chemical agent and escorted him, while handcuffed, to a shower area on February 14, 2022; a male officer who allegedly helped escort him; and another male officer who was present with him in the shower area while he was handcuffed. The City’s Corporation Counsel was ordered to provide the officers’ identities and badge numbers to the court and Bien-Aime within 60 days.

Within 30 days after receiving that information, Bien-Aime was ordered to file an amended complaint naming the identified officers and providing their badge numbers. The amended complaint would replace, rather than supplement, the original complaint. The court stated that it would screen the amended complaint and, if necessary, issue further orders concerning service and discovery.

Other disposition

The court directed the Clerk to notify the New York City Department of Correction and the New York City Law Department and to mail them copies of the order and complaint. It certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied payment-free status for purposes of an appeal.