Fowler v. The City of New York

Background

Jamarr Fowler, proceeding without a lawyer, brought an action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal law allowing claims for violations of constitutional rights by persons acting under state law. He named the City of New York; the New York City Department of Correction (DOC); NYPD Officers Bilal Belmore and Peter Besse; an NYPD sergeant identified as Jane Doe; and eleven John Doe defendants identified as NYPD or DOC personnel. The court had granted Fowler permission to proceed without prepaying filing fees.

Screening of the DOC claims

The court explained that it had to screen the complaint because Fowler was proceeding without prepaying fees. It had to dismiss claims that were frivolous, malicious, failed to state a legally viable claim, sought money from an immune defendant, or fell outside the court’s jurisdiction. The court also stated that it would read a self-represented litigant’s complaint liberally and interpret it to present the strongest claims suggested by the allegations.

The court dismissed Fowler’s claims against the New York City Department of Correction for failure to state a claim. It held that a New York City agency is not an entity that can be sued separately. Because Fowler was representing himself, the court construed his allegations against DOC as allegations against the City of New York, which was already named as a defendant.

Service and identification of defendants

The court requested that the City of New York waive service of the summons. Because Fowler was allowed to proceed without prepaying fees, the court directed the Clerk of Court to issue summonses and provide the necessary papers to the U.S. Marshals Service so the Marshals could serve Bilal Belmore and Peter Besse. The court extended the service period to 90 days after summonses issue and stated that Fowler should request more time if service was not completed within that period.

The court found that Fowler had provided enough information for the New York City Law Department to identify the nine unnamed NYPD officers, one unnamed NYPD sergeant, and two unnamed DOC correction officers. It ordered the Law Department to provide their identities, badge numbers, and service addresses to Fowler and the court within 60 days. Fowler must then file an amended complaint naming those defendants within 30 days after receiving the information. The amended complaint will replace, rather than supplement, the original complaint, and the court will screen it before deciding whether to direct service.

Discovery and appeal

The court ruled that Local Civil Rule 33.2 applies. That rule requires defendants in certain prisoner cases to answer specified interrogatories and requests for documents within 120 days after service of the complaint.

The court certified that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without prepaying fees for an appeal. The order did not decide the merits of Fowler’s constitutional claims against the City or the individual defendants.