Caldwell v. New York City Department of Law
- Colleen McMahon
- 1:19-cv-08835
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Caldwell v. New York City Department of Law, Chief Judge McMahon dismissed the CCRB claims and dismissed Officer German claims without prejudice to a pending case.
Boisey Caldwell’s claims concerning the CCRB were dismissed, and his claims against Officer Geronimo German were dismissed without prejudice to the pending case under docket number 19-CV-8253. The court also denied fee-free status for any appeal from this order.
What happened
In Caldwell v. New York City Department of Law, Boisey Caldwell sued over the Civilian Complaint Review Board’s handling of a 2018 complaint and alleged that Officer Geronimo German used excessive force. Caldwell represented himself and had permission to proceed without prepaying court fees.
The court said Caldwell’s claims about the Review Board repeated allegations from an earlier related case, where the court held that the government generally has no constitutional duty to investigate or protect someone from harm and that Caldwell had not adequately alleged municipal responsibility. The court also found that the claims against Officer German were nearly identical to claims in another case that was already pending.
Chief Judge Colleen McMahon dismissed the claims against the Review Board under the statute governing screening of fee-free complaints. She dismissed the claims against Officer German without prejudice to Caldwell’s pending case. The court also denied fee-free status for any appeal, certifying that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Caldwell v. New York City Department of Law · No. 1:19-cv-08835
- Colleen McMahon
- Nov. 22, 2019
Background
Boisey Caldwell filed the complaint on September 23, 2019, concerning a complaint he had filed with the Civilian Complaint Review Board (CCRB) in 2018. That earlier complaint concerned a police report filed with the 28th Precinct, identified as report number 06614. Caldwell also alleged that, on an unspecified date, Police Officer Geronimo German used excessive force against him. The named defendants were the New York City Department of Law and Officer German.
Caldwell represented himself. The court had previously allowed him to proceed without prepaying filing fees. Because he was proceeding without prepaying fees, the court was required to screen the complaint and dismiss it, or part of it, if it was frivolous, malicious, failed to state a legally sufficient claim, sought money from an immune defendant, or presented no federal subject-matter jurisdiction.
Claims Concerning the CCRB
The court treated Caldwell’s claims concerning the CCRB as repeating claims from an earlier related proceeding. In that proceeding, the court held that the government generally has no constitutional duty under the Fourteenth Amendment to investigate a complaint or protect an individual from harm caused by others. The court also held that Caldwell had not alleged facts sufficient to impose municipal liability, meaning legal responsibility on a local government for a constitutional violation.
The court dismissed Caldwell’s claims concerning the CCRB for the same reasons stated in the earlier order. The opinion’s conclusion states that those claims were dismissed under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B), the statute requiring dismissal of certain complaints filed without prepaying fees. The opinion does not state that this dismissal was with or without prejudice.
Claims Concerning Officer German
The court found that Caldwell’s allegations against Officer German were virtually identical to allegations in another case that was already pending in the same court under docket number 19-CV-8253. Because this complaint raised the same claims, the court concluded that filing and litigating a duplicate lawsuit would serve no useful purpose.
The court dismissed the claims against Officer German without prejudice to Caldwell’s pending claims against Officer German in docket number 19-CV-8253. Thus, the dismissal in this action did not terminate those claims as presented in the pending case.
Ruling and Litigation Warning
Chief Judge Colleen McMahon directed the clerk to assign the matter to her docket, send the order to Caldwell, and record service on the docket. The court also denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal and certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith.
The court noted that Caldwell had filed fourteen prior actions in district courts within the circuit. It repeated an earlier warning that further frivolous or otherwise nonmeritorious litigation could lead to an order barring him from filing new actions without prepayment of fees unless he first obtained permission. The opinion states that this warning remained in effect.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.