Zhang v. The City of New York

Background

Man Zhang and Chunman Zhang, individually and as administrators of the estate of their father, Zhiquan Zhang, sued the City of New York and other defendants over Mr. Zhang’s death while he was detained before trial at Rikers Island. The opinion states that Mr. Zhang had a history of hypertension and coronary disease, complained repeatedly of chest, left-arm, and lower-back pain, and died on April 18, 2016. An autopsy determined that the cause of death was hypertensive and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease.

The original complaint asserted constitutional claims under the Fifth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments, as well as wrongful death, deprivation of society and services, discrimination, negligence and malpractice, negligent supervision, intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress, and fraudulent concealment. In a prior related proceeding, the court dismissed all claims except the wrongful-death, negligence, and malpractice claims against all defendants and a Fourteenth Amendment due-process claim against the City, Corizon Health, Inc., and certain departments, employees, and agents.

Earlier Amendment Request

The plaintiffs later asked for permission to amend the complaint to reinstate a Fourteenth Amendment claim against certain New York City correction officers and supervisory defendants, including named city and health officials and a Corizon executive. They also sought to reinstate negligent-supervision and fraudulent-concealment claims against all defendants.

The court previously denied that request because the proposed amendments were futile, meaning the proposed claims would not survive a comparable motion to dismiss. The court found that the proposed allegations did not adequately plead the required mental state for deliberate indifference by the correction officers. It also found insufficient allegations of the supervisory defendants’ personal involvement, proximate cause, and intentional discrimination. The court further found inadequate allegations supporting notice for negligent supervision and justifiable reliance for fraudulent concealment.

Motion for Reconsideration

The plaintiffs moved for reconsideration of the earlier order. The court explained that reconsideration is an extraordinary remedy and generally requires an intervening change in controlling law, new evidence, or a need to correct clear error or prevent manifest injustice. It is not a way to repeat arguments already rejected or present arguments that could have been made earlier.

The court held that the plaintiffs had not identified any controlling decision or information that it had overlooked. It rejected their argument that the sufficiency of the claims should be decided by a jury, explaining that a complaint must allege enough well-pleaded facts to make relief plausible, rather than merely suggest a possible legal violation.

The court also found no manifest injustice because the plaintiffs’ Fourteenth Amendment claims against the City, the New York City Department of Correction, Rikers Island prison, the New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation, and Corizon remained pending. Their wrongful-death, negligence, and malpractice claims against all defendants also remained pending.

Disposition

The court denied the plaintiffs’ motion for reconsideration and did not reinstate the proposed claims. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate the motion docketed at ECF No. 213.