Mizrahi v. The Department of Corrections of the City of New York
- Rochon
- 1:25-cv-03987
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Mizrahi v. Department of Correction, Judge Rochon dismissed claims against the agency, substituted New York City as defendant, and ordered service.
Louis J. Mizrahi, the New York City Department of Correction, and the City of New York. The Department of Correction was dismissed as a defendant, while the City of New York was added as a defendant.
What happened
Mizrahi v. New York City Department of Correction concerns Louis J. Mizrahi’s pro se lawsuit under a federal civil-rights law alleging unconstitutional conditions of confinement. He is incarcerated at the Otis B. Bantum Center on Rikers Island and was allowed to proceed without paying court fees upfront.
The court dismissed Mizrahi’s claims against the New York City Department of Correction because a New York City agency cannot be sued as a separate entity. The court instead treated the complaint as naming the City of New York, directed the Clerk to add the City as a defendant, and requested that the City waive formal service of the lawsuit.
Judge Jennifer L. Rochon ordered the Department of Correction and the New York City Law Department to receive the order and directed that an information package be mailed to Mizrahi. The order did not decide whether Mizrahi’s conditions-of-confinement allegations are legally valid or whether the City has other defenses.
The detailed version
- Mizrahi v. The Department of Corrections of the City of New York · No. 1:25-cv-03987
- Rochon
- June 9, 2025
Background
Louis J. Mizrahi, who is incarcerated at the Otis B. Bantum Center on Rikers Island, filed this lawsuit without a lawyer under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He alleges that he is being subjected to unconstitutional conditions of confinement. The court had previously granted him permission to proceed without paying the filing fee in advance.
Screening of the Complaint
The court explained that federal law requires screening of a complaint filed by a person proceeding without prepaying fees. The court must dismiss claims that are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a legally valid claim, seek money from an immune defendant, or fall outside the court’s jurisdiction. The court also must read a self-represented person’s allegations liberally and interpret them to present the strongest claims reasonably suggested by the complaint.
Department of Correction
The court held that the New York City Department of Correction is an agency of the City and is not a separate entity that can be sued. Because Mizrahi clearly intended to assert claims against New York City, the court construed the complaint as asserting those claims against the City and directed the Clerk of Court to amend the caption to replace the Department of Correction with the City of New York.
The court’s amendment was without prejudice to any defenses the City may later assert. The opinion does not decide the merits of Mizrahi’s allegations about his confinement.
Disposition
The court dismissed Mizrahi’s claims against the Department of Correction under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). It directed the Clerk to add the City of New York as a defendant, notify the Department of Correction and the New York City Law Department, request that the City waive service of summons, and mail Mizrahi an information package. Judge Jennifer L. Rochon signed the order.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.