Walker v. Fierro
- Nelson Roman
- 7:17-cv-05245
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 8
In Walker v. Fierro, Judge Roman granted the officers’ motion to dismiss Walker’s civil-rights claims in its entirety.
Rahmel A. Walker’s claims against correctional officers C. Fierro and S. Ortiz were dismissed, and the action was terminated.
What happened
Walker v. Fierro involved Rahmel A. Walker’s claims that correctional officers C. Fierro and S. Ortiz verbally harassed him and were involved in a physical assault and denial of medical treatment at Fishkill Correctional Facility.
Walker, who represented himself, alleged that Fierro and Ortiz used insulting and threatening language, that Fierro issued a false misbehavior ticket and restricted him, and that unidentified officers later choked and slammed him. He also alleged that he was denied medical treatment, but did not specify the date, the officers involved, or the injuries.
Judge Nelson S. Roman granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss in its entirety. The court dismissed the verbal-harassment claims with prejudice and dismissed the physical-assault and medical-care claims because Walker had not provided enough specific facts to state claims under the federal civil-rights statute.
The detailed version
- Walker v. Fierro · No. 7:17-cv-05245
- Nelson Roman
- Dec. 13, 2019
Background
Rahmel A. Walker, a self-represented inmate at Fishkill Correctional Facility, brought claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against correctional officers C. Fierro and S. Ortiz. The operative pleading was Walker’s second amended complaint. The defendants moved to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), arguing that the complaint did not plead plausible claims. The motion was unopposed.
Walker alleged that Fierro and Ortiz engaged in aggressive and hostile conduct toward him. He described incidents on or about May 28, 2017, and June 15, 2017. His allegations included verbal insults, threats, harassment, a false misbehavior ticket, being locked in his housing cell, and statements that might cause other inmates to retaliate against him. Walker also alleged that Fierro referred to him with an insulting term while addressing inmates in his housing block.
Walker separately alleged that, on an unspecified date and time, unidentified people pulled him over near the mess hall, placed him against a wall, choked him, slammed him to the floor, and prevented him from receiving medical treatment. He did not identify which defendant or defendants participated in that incident or describe the nature of any resulting injuries.
Court’s analysis
The court explained that a complaint must include enough factual detail to make a claim plausible, while self-represented complaints receive a liberal reading. A claim under Section 1983 requires conduct by a person acting under state law that deprived the plaintiff of a constitutional or federal statutory right.
The court held that allegations of verbal harassment, even when inappropriate, do not by themselves support a Section 1983 claim. It also rejected Walker’s speculation that the defendants hoped other inmates would blame or retaliate against him. The verbal-harassment claims were dismissed with prejudice.
The court dismissed the physical-assault claim because Walker did not clearly identify the date and time, the individual or individuals who allegedly assaulted him, or the injuries he suffered. The court also dismissed any claim for deliberate indifference to medical needs under the Eighth Amendment because Walker did not describe the nature or extent of his injuries or allege facts showing that a defendant knowingly disregarded a serious medical need.
Disposition
Judge Nelson S. Roman granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss in its entirety. The Clerk was directed to terminate the motion, terminate the action, mail the opinion to Walker, and show proof of service on the docket.
Read the full 8-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.