Syville v. City of New York

Background

Alphonso Syville, appearing without a lawyer, sued the City of New York, Project Renewal, the director of the Fort Washington Men’s Shelter, and the shelter’s operations supervisor, identified by the first name Jody. He alleges that, after being released from Bellevue Hospital, he requested access to medication and bedrest at the shelter and that defendants denied those requests. He also alleges retaliation for his speech and seeks money damages.

Syville identifies claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Rehabilitation Act, and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act. Based on the allegations, the court additionally interpreted the complaint as asserting a disability-accommodation claim against Project Renewal under Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act and a First Amendment retaliation claim against the City of New York. The court had previously allowed Syville to proceed without paying filing fees.

Court’s Actions

The court explained that complaints filed by people who proceed without paying filing fees must be dismissed if they are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a legally valid claim, seek money from an immune defendant, or fall outside the court’s subject-matter jurisdiction. It also stated that it must read a self-represented litigant’s allegations liberally while still requiring a short and plain statement showing entitlement to relief.

The court ordered that Syville’s complaint and his January 24, 2020 letter with two attachments be treated as the operative pleading. The attachments included hospital discharge papers stating that his doctor ordered bedrest and a police report about an incident at the shelter involving Jody.

Because Syville was proceeding without paying filing fees, the court directed the Clerk of Court to issue summonses and provide the necessary papers to the U.S. Marshals Service for service on the City of New York and Project Renewal. The court extended the service deadline to 90 days after the summonses are issued and stated that Syville should request an extension if service is not completed on time. It also required Syville to notify the court of any address change.

Under a procedure allowing a self-represented litigant to receive help identifying a defendant, the court ordered Project Renewal’s counsel to determine the identities and service addresses of the shelter’s director and the supervisor named Jody within 60 days. After receiving that information, Syville must file an amended complaint naming those defendants within 30 days. The amended complaint will replace, rather than supplement, the original complaint, and the court will screen it if necessary.

Disposition

The order is a procedural order. It directs service and defendant identification; it does not decide the merits of Syville’s disability, health-information, or retaliation claims. The court directed the Clerk to mail the order and related materials to Syville, treated documents 2 and 4 as the operative pleading, and denied permission to appeal without paying fees for purposes of an appeal after certifying that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.