Bentley v. City of Peekskill

Background

William Bentley, representing himself, brought this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that the defendants violated his federal constitutional rights. The court had previously allowed him to proceed without prepaying filing fees. The defendants named in the complaint were the City of Peekskill, New York; the Peekskill Police Department; Detective John Doe; Officer Kreuscher; Sergeant John Doe; and John/Jane Does 1-5.

Because Bentley was proceeding without prepaying fees, the court reviewed the complaint under the federal screening statute. That statute requires dismissal of claims that are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim on which relief may be granted, or seek money from an immune defendant. The court also noted that it must dismiss a case when it lacks subject-matter jurisdiction, meaning authority to hear the dispute.

Claims Against the Police Department

The court held that the Peekskill Police Department was not a separate suable entity because the City Charter did not authorize it to sue or be sued in its own name. In light of Bentley’s self-represented status, the court treated any claims against the Police Department as claims against the City of Peekskill, which was already named as a defendant.

The court’s conclusion states that it dismisses Bentley’s claims against the Peekskill Police Department for failure to state a claim on which relief may be granted under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii).

Service and Identification of Defendants

The court directed the Clerk of Court to issue summonses for Officer Kreuscher and the City of Peekskill, complete the required U.S. Marshals Service forms with their addresses, and provide the necessary papers to the Marshals Service. Because Bentley was allowed to proceed without prepaying fees, he may rely on the court and the Marshals Service to complete service.

The court stated that service must occur within 90 days after the summonses are issued. It said Bentley should request an extension if service is not completed within that period. Bentley must also notify the court in writing if his address changes.

The court issued an identification order requiring the City of Peekskill’s Corporation Counsel to determine the identities, badge numbers, and service addresses of the John or Jane Doe defendants involved in Bentley’s arrest and related events on October 14, 2025. The Corporation Counsel must provide that information to Bentley and the court within 60 days of the order. Once the Doe defendants are identified, the court will treat the complaint as amended and may direct the Clerk to prepare additional service forms.

Disposition

Judge Philip M. Halpern dismissed the claims against the Peekskill Police Department. The court ordered the Clerk to issue summonses and arrange service on Officer Kreuscher and the City of Peekskill, and ordered the City’s Corporation Counsel to identify the Doe defendants. The court also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Bentley permission to proceed without prepaying fees for an appeal.