Zeng v. City of New York

Background

Xiamin Zeng, proceeding without a lawyer, brought claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal law that allows claims for violations of constitutional rights by state or local officials. Her claims arose from arrests on January 24, 2019, and March 4, 2019, and her later detention on Rikers Island. The court had previously allowed her to proceed without prepaying filing fees.

The court interpreted the amended complaint as asserting claims that Detective Estavillo falsely arrested Zeng; Captain Dennis Gray, Deputy Inspector Rhonda O’Reilly Bovell, and Detective Patrick Lynaugh retaliated against her by not arresting the father of her child; unnamed correction officers violated her rights during her detention; Administration for Children’s Services officials Eunice Iwenofu and Rachelle Soku initiated her arrest; and school administrators Karen Feuer and Rosalynn Sanchez initiated an ACS investigation that resulted in her arrest. Zeng also named the City of New York, ACS Commissioner David Hansell, and ACS Supervisor Beatrice Benon, and later added Gregory Russ and Vito Mustaciuolo of the New York City Housing Authority.

Court’s analysis and orders

Because Zeng was allowed to proceed without prepaying fees, the court screened the complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915. That law requires dismissal of claims that are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim, seek money from an immune defendant, or fall outside the court’s subject-matter jurisdiction. The court also said that self-represented pleadings must be read liberally.

As to Gray, Bovell, and Lynaugh, the court explained that a private person generally has no legally protected interest in having someone else arrested or prosecuted. The court nevertheless granted Zeng 60 days’ leave to amend because it was not clear that amendment would be futile. The court directed her to provide facts showing how those defendants violated her rights.

The court also granted Zeng 60 days’ leave to amend her claims against Russ and Mustaciuolo. It found that she had not alleged facts showing their personal involvement in the claimed constitutional violations. The court explained that a person generally cannot be held liable under § 1983 merely because that person supervises or employs someone who allegedly violated another person’s rights.

For Hansell, Benon, Iwenofu, Soku, Feuer, Sanchez, and the City of New York, the court directed the Clerk of Court to prepare summonses and paperwork so the U.S. Marshals Service could serve them. The time for service was extended to 90 days after the summonses were issued. The court directed the New York City Law Department to obtain a service address for Detective Estavillo and provide it to Zeng and the court. It also asked specified correction officers at the Rose M. Singer Center on Rikers Island to waive service of summons.

Disposition

The court granted Zeng leave to file a second amended complaint within 60 days. The new complaint would replace, rather than supplement, the amended complaint. The court directed the Clerk to take the listed service steps and ordered Zeng to notify the court if her address changed. The order did not decide the ultimate merits of Zeng’s claims. The court certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal.