Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled July 1, 2020

Garcia v. Palmenteri

Judge
Katherine Failla
Docket
1:19-cv-07441-KPF
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Garcia v. Palmenteri, Judge Failla granted the City’s request to continue staying the case while the Department of Correction completes its investigation.

Who this affects

The stay affects Angel Garcia, the City of New York, and the individually named defendants in the case by pausing the litigation until the Department of Correction’s investigation concludes.

What happened

In Angel Garcia v. C.Q. Palmenteri, et al., Garcia alleges that a correction officer used excessive force against him and that two officials later denied medical treatment for his hand.

The City asked the court to keep the case on hold while the New York City Department of Correction completes its internal investigation. The City said the investigation remained under supervisory review and that the COVID-19 pandemic and staffing shortages had delayed it; Garcia agreed to the continued stay.

Judge Katherine Polk Failla granted the application and continued the stay until the investigation concludes. She ordered the City to provide a status letter by October 30, 2020, or 14 days after the investigation ends, whichever comes first.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Garcia v. Palmenteri · No. 1:19-cv-07441-KPF
Judge
Katherine Failla
Date
July 1, 2020

Background

Garcia alleges that on April 15, 2019, while he was in the custody of the New York City Department of Correction at the George R. Vierno Center, Correction Officer Palmenteri used excessive force against him. Garcia also alleges that he was denied medical treatment for his hand, first by Palmenteri and later by Captain Charles.

The Department of Correction began an internal investigation. The court had previously stayed the case on October 24, 2019. The City reported that the investigation’s results were pending supervisory review.

Request to Continue the Stay

The City asked the court to continue the stay until the investigation concluded. It argued that the parties had limited access to documents and other information about the incident during the investigation and no access to materials generated during the investigation because, according to the City, those materials were protected from disclosure by privilege.

The City also argued that the ongoing review affected its Office of Corporation Counsel’s representation of the individually named defendants. It said that without access to documents and the officers involved, the Office would be unable to respond fully to the complaint or participate effectively in conferences, discovery, or settlement. The City additionally cited the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, remote work, New York’s pause orders, and staffing shortages.

Garcia consented to continuing the stay.

Ruling

Judge Katherine Polk Failla granted the City’s application. The case will remain stayed pending the conclusion of the Department of Correction’s investigation into the alleged incident.

The court ordered the City to submit a letter about the investigation’s status by the earlier of October 30, 2020, or 14 days after the investigation concludes. The court also directed Garcia to continue keeping the court and the defendants informed of his mailing address.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.