Starkes v. Annucci

Background

Quentin Starkes brought this action without a lawyer under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal law allowing claims for violations of constitutional rights by persons acting under state law. He sought damages and injunctive relief. The court had previously allowed him to proceed without paying the filing fee upfront.

Starkes alleged that on July 20, 2019, while he was held as a federal prisoner at the Westchester County Jail, three other prisoners beat him. He believed he should have been housed with other federal prisoners. He alleged that C.O. Nieves opened the cells of the prisoners who attacked him and that C.O. Rivera and C.O. Byrd told Nieves which cells to open. He also sued Anthony J. Annucci, identified as the Acting Commissioner of the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision. Starkes requested a transfer to a federal facility and $2,000,000 in damages.

Court’s analysis

The court said it was unclear whether Starkes was a post-conviction prisoner or a pretrial detainee. It therefore considered the claim under both the Eighth Amendment and the Fourteenth Amendment.

For a convicted prisoner, the Eighth Amendment requires correction officials to take reasonable measures to protect the prisoner from violence by other prisoners. A failure-to-protect claim requires facts showing that officials were deliberately indifferent—meaning they were aware of a serious risk to the prisoner’s safety and disregarded it. For a pretrial detainee, the Fourteenth Amendment applies. Under that standard, the detainee may proceed by alleging that an official intentionally imposed the condition or recklessly failed to take reasonable care even though the official knew, or should have known, of the excessive risk.

The court also explained that a § 1983 plaintiff must allege each defendant’s direct and personal involvement. A supervisor cannot be held liable solely because someone who violated the plaintiff’s rights worked for the supervisor. The court concluded that Starkes alleged no facts showing Annucci’s personal involvement, and noted that Annucci did not oversee the Westchester County Jail. The court further concluded that the allegations against Byrd, Rivera, and Nieves did not show that they knew, or should have known, that the other prisoners posed a serious risk to Starkes or that they disregarded such a risk.

Disposition

The court denied Starkes’s request for a transfer to a federal facility as moot. It granted Starkes leave to file an amended complaint within 60 days. The amended complaint had to identify only defendants personally involved in the alleged constitutional violations and explain the relevant facts, including what each defendant did or failed to do, when and where the events occurred, the resulting injuries, and the relief sought. The court stated that the amended complaint would replace, rather than supplement, the original complaint. No summons would issue at that time.

The court warned that if Starkes did not timely amend and could not show good cause for failing to do so, the action would be dismissed for failure to state a claim. It also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without prepaying fees for an appeal.