Paloma v. New York City Department of Corrections

Background

Miriahm Paloma, who was being held at the Rose M. Singer Center (RMSC) on Rikers Island, filed this action without a lawyer. She sought damages and alleged that the defendants violated her constitutional rights. The court construed her complaint as asserting claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the federal civil-rights statute, and under state law.

The court had previously allowed Paloma to proceed without paying the filing fee upfront. Under the Prison Litigation Reform Act, the court was required to screen her complaint and dismiss any claim that was frivolous, malicious, failed to state a claim, or sought money from a defendant protected from such relief.

Rose M. Singer Center

The court dismissed Paloma’s § 1983 claims against the RMSC. To bring a § 1983 claim, a plaintiff must allege that a federal right was violated by a person acting under state law. The court held that the RMSC, as a jail, is not a “person” that can be sued under § 1983.

New York City Department of Correction

The court dismissed Paloma’s claims against the New York City Department of Correction because it is an agency of New York City and is not an entity that can generally be sued separately from the City. Because Paloma was proceeding without a lawyer and appeared clearly to intend to assert claims against New York City, the court treated her complaint as asserting claims against the City and directed the Clerk of Court to replace the Department of Correction with the City in the case caption. The court stated that this amendment was without prejudice to any defenses the City might assert.

Other defendants and disposition

The court directed the Clerk of Court to add the City of New York as a defendant. It requested that the City and Correction Captains Speights and Folks waive service of summons and directed that the New York City Department of Correction and the New York City Law Department receive electronic notice of the order.

Judge Edgardo Ramos concluded that the claims against the RMSC and the New York City Department of Correction were dismissed. The court did not dismiss the action against Captains Speights and Folks or the newly added City in this order. It also certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without paying fees.