Wheeler v. NYC DOC

Background

Brett Wheeler, currently incarcerated in Sullivan Correctional Facility, brought this pro se action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. That statute allows claims for violations of federal rights by state or local officials acting under government authority. Wheeler alleges that a correction officer violated his rights while he was detained on Rikers Island. The defendant is identified in the caption as “NYC DOC: JOHN DOE # 1.”

The court had previously granted Wheeler permission to proceed without paying the filing fee upfront. The opinion states that prisoners must still pay the full filing fee over time even when granted that permission.

Identification of the John Doe Defendant

Because Wheeler sued an unidentified officer, the court applied the rule that a person proceeding without a lawyer is entitled to the district court’s assistance in identifying a defendant. The court found that Wheeler’s complaint supplied enough information for the New York City Department of Correction to identify the officer involved in the alleged June 6, 2018 incident in Wheeler’s housing area on Rikers Island.

The court ordered the New York City Law Department, identified as the attorney and agent for the Department of Correction, to determine the officer’s identity and the address where the officer can be served with the lawsuit. If the officer is a current or former Department of Correction employee, the Law Department was directed to state whether electronic service-waiver procedures could be used. If the person worked at a Department of Correction facility but was not a current or former employee or official, the Law Department was directed to provide a residential service address.

Required Next Steps and Disposition

The Law Department must provide the identifying and service information to Wheeler and the court within 60 days of the order. Within 30 days after receiving that information, Wheeler must file a second amended complaint naming the John Doe defendant. The second amended complaint will replace, rather than supplement, the earlier complaints. The court stated that it will screen the second amended complaint after it is filed and may then ask the defendant to waive service.

Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil directed the Clerk of Court to mail the order and an information package to Wheeler and to mail the order and complaint to the New York City Law Department. This order addressed identification and case-processing steps; it did not decide whether Wheeler’s underlying civil-rights allegations are valid.