Postell v. Wells

Background

Jonathan Postell filed the action without a lawyer under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, and New York State and New York City human-rights laws. He alleged that his employer discriminated against him based on race, color, gender, age, and disability. The court had previously allowed him to proceed without paying the filing fee and treated a letter to the court as a supplement to his amended complaint.

Screening standard

Because Postell was allowed to proceed without paying the filing fee, the court was required to screen his complaint. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B), the court had to dismiss claims that were frivolous, malicious, failed to state a legally valid claim, or sought money from an immune defendant. The court also had to dismiss claims if it lacked subject-matter jurisdiction. Although filings by people without lawyers are read generously, they still must provide enough facts to make a claim plausible under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8.

Claims against the individual defendants

The court held that individuals cannot be held personally liable under Title VII, the Americans with Disabilities Act, or the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. It also found that Postell alleged no facts showing that Wells, Mercado, Silverman, or Deutsch were personally involved in violating his rights. The court therefore dismissed Postell’s claims against Kelly Hobby Wells, Pennie Mercado, Jenny Silverman, and Laurie Burke Deutsch under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). The opinion noted that New York State and New York City human-rights laws can allow claims against individuals, but such claims require allegations of personal involvement or aiding and abetting discrimination or retaliation.

Service on Fallsburg Library

The court explained that a person allowed to proceed without paying the filing fee may rely on the court and the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the defendant. Because Postell could not serve Fallsburg Library until the court reviewed the amended complaint and ordered a summons, the court extended the service period to 90 days after the summons was issued. The clerk was instructed to complete the required service form, issue the summons, and provide the necessary documents to the Marshals Service. The court also stated that Postell 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 Nelson S. Roman ordered the clerk to mail Postell a copy of the order and an information package. The court dismissed the claims against Wells, Mercado, Silverman, and Deutsch, directed the clerk to arrange service on Fallsburg Library, and certified that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith. The court therefore denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal.