Genao v. City Of New York
- Lewis Liman
- 1:20-cv-02441
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Genao v. City of New York, Judge Liman dismissed claims against DOC, added the City and named officers, and requested waiver of service.
Gabino Genao’s claims against the New York City Department of Correction were dismissed, while the City of New York and the identified officers and wardens remained involved in the action. The order also affected Genao’s ability to proceed without paying fees on appeal.
What happened
In Genao v. City of New York, Gabino Genao brought a self-represented lawsuit under a federal civil-rights law, claiming that the defendants violated his constitutional rights. The court had already allowed him to proceed without paying the filing fee upfront.
The court dismissed Genao’s claims against the New York City Department of Correction because the agency could not be sued as a separate entity. It added the City of New York instead, and replaced the unnamed mailroom defendants with the officers and captain identified in the complaint.
Judge Lewis Liman directed the clerk to notify the relevant offices and requested that the City, the named officers, and the wardens waive formal service of the lawsuit. The court also denied fee-waiver status for any appeal, while allowing the claims against the replacement defendants to proceed at this stage.
The detailed version
- Genao v. City Of New York · No. 1:20-cv-02441
- Lewis Liman
- Apr. 8, 2020
Background
Gabino Genao, who was detained at the North Infirmary Command on Rikers Island, filed this self-represented action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal law that permits claims alleging violations of constitutional rights by government actors. The court had previously granted his request to proceed without paying the filing fee upfront.
The complaint named the New York City Department of Correction, unnamed mailroom officers at the North Infirmary Command and the Otis Bantum Correctional Center, Warden Sharlisa Walter, and Warden Freeman as defendants.
Claims Against the Department of Correction
The court dismissed Genao’s claims against the New York City Department of Correction. It relied on New York City law and federal decisions stating that a New York City agency generally is not an entity that can be sued separately. Because Genao was self-represented and clearly intended to assert claims against the City of New York, the court construed the complaint as making claims against the City and directed the clerk to add the City as a defendant under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 21. The court stated that this amendment was without prejudice to any defenses the City might assert.
Replacement of Unnamed Defendants
The court also construed the complaint as naming the individual officers discussed in its body. It directed the clerk to replace the unnamed mailroom defendants with NIC Mailroom Officer Rodriguez, NIC Correction Officers Knepple and Morgan, NIC Captain Smith, and OBCC Mailroom Officer Ms. Sands. The court stated that this amendment was without prejudice to any defenses these defendants might assert.
Service and Disposition
The court directed the clerk to notify the New York City Department of Correction and the New York City Law Department of the order. It requested that the City, the four identified NIC officials, Ms. Sands, Warden Sharlisa Walter, and Warden Freeman waive service of summons. The court directed that a copy of the order and an information package be mailed to Genao.
The order expressly dismissed Genao’s claims against the New York City Department of Correction. It did not decide the underlying constitutional claims against the City or the individual defendants. The court certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-waiver status for purposes of an appeal. Judge Lewis Liman signed the order on April 8, 2020.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.