Carzoglio v. Abrams

Background

Angelo A. Carzoglio, proceeding without a lawyer, brought this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal law allowing claims against people acting under state law for violating federal constitutional rights. He alleged that events at the Westchester County Jail in 2017 violated the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments. The alleged events included two pat frisks and strip searches ordered by Thomas Abrams; verbal abuse and threats concerning medication by King-Bogle, described as a health care gatekeeper employed by Correct Care Solutions; pricing, shipping, handling, and alleged favoritism involving Aramark commissary and food products; and the handling of his grievances by Karl Vollmer, Sgt. Middleton, and Sgt. I. Lopez. Westchester County was also named as a defendant.

The Medical Care Defendants, Aramark, and the County Defendants moved to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), which tests whether a complaint states a legally sufficient claim. Abrams had not appeared or filed a motion to dismiss.

Rulings

Aramark claims. The court dismissed with prejudice Carzoglio’s claims concerning Aramark’s commissary items and I-CARE food packages, including alleged favoritism and price gouging. The court held that the complaint did not explain how Aramark’s pricing, shipping, handling, or food services violated Carzoglio’s constitutional rights. It also found the favoritism allegations vague and unsupported, and stated that inmates do not have a constitutional right to use a prison commissary, challenge its prices, or require particular products to be sold.

Medical Care Defendants. The court dismissed without prejudice the claims against King-Bogle and Correct Care Solutions. Because Carzoglio was a pretrial detainee, the court analyzed the claims under the Fourteenth Amendment. It held that the complaint alleged verbal abuse and threats but did not allege that Carzoglio’s medication was actually tampered with or identify injuries directly caused by King-Bogle’s statements. The court allowed Carzoglio to replead if he could allege additional facts showing serious harm beyond verbal abuse.

Abrams. The court allowed Carzoglio’s Fourth Amendment claim against Abrams to proceed. Carzoglio alleged that Abrams ordered the May 19 and June 8, 2017 pat frisks and strip searches to harass and humiliate him and for Abrams’s own gratification. The court held that, read liberally, these allegations plausibly claimed that the searches were unreasonable because they lacked a legitimate security purpose or were conducted abusively.

Vollmer, Middleton, and Lopez. The court dismissed without prejudice Carzoglio’s claims against Vollmer. It held that merely denying grievances about completed searches did not adequately allege that Vollmer was personally involved in an ongoing constitutional violation or had the ability to remedy it. The court dismissed with prejudice the claims against Middleton concerning the Aramark-related allegations because the underlying Aramark claims had been dismissed with prejudice. It dismissed without prejudice the claims against Lopez concerning King-Bogle’s alleged verbal abuse and allowed Carzoglio to replead facts supporting Lopez’s personal involvement if he repleaded the Medical Care claims.

Westchester County. The court dismissed without prejudice the claims against Westchester County. Under Monell, a municipality may be liable under § 1983 only when an official policy or custom caused the constitutional violation; it cannot be held liable merely because it employed the person accused of misconduct. The court found that the allegations that Abrams worked for the Westchester Department of Corrections and was later suspended did not plausibly show a County policy or custom causing the alleged searches. Carzoglio was allowed to replead if he could allege additional facts establishing such a policy or custom.

Disposition and next steps

The court granted the moving defendants’ motions to dismiss in their entirety. Specifically, claims against Aramark and Middleton were dismissed with prejudice. Claims against the Medical Care Defendants, Vollmer, Lopez, and Westchester County were dismissed without prejudice. The Fourth Amendment claim against Abrams remained. Carzoglio could file an amended complaint by March 26, 2020, limited by the court’s instruction that the amended complaint would replace rather than supplement the original complaint. If he did not file one by that date, Abrams was directed to answer the original complaint by April 27, 2020.