Obiagwu v. Chohan

Background

Emmanuel Obiagwu brings constitutional claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the City of New York, the New York City Police Department (NYPD), seven individual NYPD officers—Atif Chohan, Kaisean Branche, Amanda Ebrahim, Andrew Yoli, Mohammad Khan, Vadym Khalos, and Garret Williams—and a John Doe NYPD officer. The order identifies Obiagwu as a pro se litigant, meaning he is proceeding without a lawyer.

Claims Against the NYPD

The court dismissed Obiagwu’s claims against the NYPD. It relied on New York City Charter section 396 and cited authority stating that a City agency generally is not an entity that can be sued separately. The court stated that the claims asserted against the NYPD may instead be asserted against the City of New York, which is already a named defendant. The conclusion directs the Clerk of Court to terminate the NYPD as a defendant.

Service of the Named Defendants

The court directed the Clerk to electronically notify the NYPD and the New York City Law Department of the order. It requested that the City of New York and the seven named individual officers waive service of the summons. The opinion uses a request for waiver rather than stating that the defendants must waive service.

Identifying the John Doe Defendant

Under the cited Second Circuit precedent, the court stated that a pro se litigant is entitled to help identifying a defendant. Because Obiagwu supplied enough information to allow identification of the John Doe officer, the court directed the New York City Law Department to determine that officer’s identity, badge number, and address for service. The Law Department must provide the information to Obiagwu and the court within 60 days of the order.

Within 30 days after receiving the information, Obiagwu must file an amended complaint naming the John Doe defendant. The amended complaint will replace, rather than supplement, the original complaint. The court will then screen the amended complaint and, if necessary, issue a further order concerning service on the newly named defendant.

Disposition and Scope of the Order

Judge Jesse M. Furman dismissed the claims against the NYPD, directed the Clerk to terminate that defendant, requested service waivers from the City and seven named officers, and directed the Law Department to identify the John Doe defendant. The order does not decide whether Obiagwu’s underlying constitutional claims are legally or factually valid.