Smalls v. Kirby Psychiatric Center

Background

Aaron Demond Smalls, who was representing himself, sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal civil-rights law, concerning his involuntary hospitalization and medication. The complaint alleged that Manhattan Supreme Psychiatric Center found him unfit for a grand-larceny case, that Kirby Psychiatric Center forged documents and placed him in treatment over his objection, and that a doctor forced him to take antipsychotic medication and restrained him. Smalls also alleged that he was later forced to go to South Beach Psychiatric Center. He sought to clear his record and recover $100 million in damages.

The court had previously allowed Smalls to proceed without paying the filing fee in advance, but it screened the complaint under laws requiring review of prisoner complaints. The court also considered an earlier related proceeding involving psychiatrists whose evaluations had found Smalls unfit to proceed to trial. The court did not reproduce the earlier proceeding's party names here because the present opinion identifies Smalls by his full name but refers to that matter as an earlier case.

Rulings on the Defendants

The court dismissed the claims against Kirby and South Beach because both are New York State agencies operated by the Office of Mental Health. The court held that the Eleventh Amendment—constitutional immunity that generally protects states and their agencies from federal-court damages suits—barred Smalls's § 1983 claims for money damages against those facilities. The court directed the Clerk of Court to terminate both facilities as defendants. The order states that this dismissal is without prejudice to claims Smalls may pursue against individuals employed at South Beach in a new action in the Eastern District of New York.

The court construed the claims against “Manhattan Supreme Court Psychiatric Center” as claims against New York City Health + Hospitals, which operates the entity the court understood to be Manhattan Forensic Psychiatric Evaluation Court Clinic. Under Rule 21, the court directed the Clerk to substitute New York City Health + Hospitals for that defendant and to terminate “Manhattan Supreme Court Psychiatric Center.” The court dismissed the claims against New York City Health + Hospitals for failure to state a claim, with leave to replead. It explained that Smalls had not alleged a policy, custom, or practice of Health + Hospitals that caused a violation of his constitutional rights.

Hospitalization and Medication Claims

The court construed the complaint as raising Fourteenth Amendment procedural- and substantive-due-process claims against individuals involved in deciding that Smalls should be hospitalized and against individuals at Kirby who allegedly decided to medicate him involuntarily. Procedural due process concerns whether the required procedures were followed before depriving someone of a protected liberty interest. Substantive due process concerns whether the government's action itself was constitutionally improper.

The court concluded that Smalls had not alleged facts showing that any individual failed to follow New York's Mental Hygiene Law procedures for involuntary hospitalization. It also concluded that he had not alleged facts showing that medical staff violated his substantive due-process rights by medicating him against his will. The court therefore granted leave to amend so that Smalls could identify the individual defendants and provide facts supporting these claims. The court specifically granted leave to amend claims concerning treatment at Kirby.

For the South Beach claims, the court found that Smalls had not named individual defendants or described conduct by particular individuals that violated the Mental Hygiene Law. The court declined to grant leave to amend those claims in this action because South Beach is located in Richmond County, which is within the Eastern District of New York. It dismissed the South Beach claims without prejudice to Smalls bringing a new civil action there.

Instructions to Amend and Disposition

The court granted Smalls 60 days from the order's date to file an amended complaint. The amended complaint must replace the original complaint, rather than add to it, so Smalls must repeat any facts or claims he wants the court to consider. He must name the individuals involved, or use “John Doe” or “Jane Doe” if he does not know their names, and must describe the relevant events, dates, locations, injuries, and requested relief. The court stated that if he does not file an amended complaint on time and cannot show good cause, the complaint will be dismissed for failure to state a claim.

The court also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without prepaying appeal fees. Judge Kimba M. Wood signed the order.