Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Aug. 11, 2020

Coke v. New York State Department of Corrections & Community Supervision…

Full caption

Coke v. New York State Department of Corrections & Community Supervision Medical Services Department

Judge
Philip Halpern
Docket
7:19-cv-10038
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
5
Civil RightsSection 1983Pro SeCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Coke v. Koeningsman, Judge Halpern dismissed claims against Parker and Ferdous but ordered service on McKoy and Quick.

Who this affects

The order affected William James Coke Sr.’s claims against Frederick Parker and Riza Ferdous, which were dismissed, and allowed service to proceed against Jeff McKoy and Q. Quick.

What happened

William James Coke Sr. sued officials alleging violations of his constitutional rights. He filed a second amended complaint naming Jeff McKoy, Q. Quick, Frederick Parker, and Riza Ferdous as additional defendants.

The court found that Coke did not allege facts showing Parker’s or Ferdous’s personal involvement in a constitutional violation. It therefore dismissed all claims against them for failure to state a claim.

Judge Philip M. Halpern ordered the U.S. Marshals Service to serve McKoy and Quick. The court also extended the service deadline to 90 days after the summonses are issued.

The detailed version

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

Case
Coke v. New York State Department of Corrections & Community Supervision… · No. 7:19-cv-10038
Judge
Philip Halpern
Date
Aug. 11, 2020

Background

William James Coke Sr., who was incarcerated at Sing Sing Correctional Facility and proceeding without a lawyer and without prepaying filing fees, alleged that the defendants violated his constitutional rights. The court had previously allowed him to file a second amended complaint, which added Jeff McKoy, Q. Quick, Frederick Parker, and Riza Ferdous as defendants.

Claims Against Parker and Ferdous

The court explained that a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 requires facts showing that each defendant was personally and directly involved in the alleged constitutional violation. Coke did not allege facts showing personal involvement by Parker or Ferdous. The court also noted that Coke’s complaint and a prior letter suggested that he did not intend to seek liability against them. The court therefore dismissed all claims against Parker and Ferdous for failure to state a claim on which relief may be granted, under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii).

Service on McKoy and Quick

Because Coke was allowed to proceed without prepaying filing fees, the court directed the Clerk of Court to issue summonses and prepare the required service forms for McKoy and Quick. The U.S. Marshals Service was directed to serve those defendants. The court extended the time for service to 90 days after the summonses are issued. It also stated that Coke must notify the court in writing if his address changes and that the action could be dismissed if he failed to do so.

Disposition

Judge Philip M. Halpern ordered service on Jeff McKoy and Q. Quick and dismissed all claims against Frederick Parker and Riza Ferdous. The opinion does not decide the ultimate merits of Coke’s remaining claims.

The authoritative version

Read the full 5-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.