Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Oct. 8, 2020

Massey v. Michele

Judge
Analisa Torres
Docket
1:20-cv-07621
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
Civil RightsSection 1983Pro SeCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Massey v. Michele, Judge Torres dismissed claims against DOC as not suable and requested service waivers from the City and Officer Michele.

Who this affects

Tyrone Massey’s claims against the New York City Department of Corrections were dismissed; the order requested service waivers from the City of New York and Correction Officer Michele.

What happened

In Massey v. Michele, Tyrone Massey, representing himself, sued under a federal civil-rights law, claiming that defendants ignored serious medical needs while he was detained at the George R. Vierno Center on Rikers Island.

The court dismissed Massey’s claims against the New York City Department of Corrections because that agency cannot be sued in its own name. The court requested that the City of New York and Correction Officer Michele waive service of the summons.

Judge Analisa Torres also stated that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without paying fees for an appeal.

The detailed version

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

Case
Massey v. Michele · No. 1:20-cv-07621
Judge
Analisa Torres
Date
Oct. 8, 2020

Background

Tyrone Massey, who was detained at the Manhattan Detention Complex, brought this self-represented action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He alleged that Correction Officer Michele, the City of New York, and the New York City Department of Corrections were deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs while he was detained at the George R. Vierno Center on Rikers Island. The court had previously granted Massey permission to proceed without paying the filing fee immediately.

Screening standard

The court explained that it must screen the complaint and dismiss claims that are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a legally valid claim, seek money from an immune defendant, or fall outside the court’s subject-matter jurisdiction. The court also stated that it must read a self-represented plaintiff’s allegations liberally.

Ruling

The court dismissed Massey’s claims against the New York City Department of Corrections because, as an agency of the City of New York, it lacks the capacity to be sued in its own name. The order did not dismiss the claims against the City of New York or Correction Officer Michele. Instead, the court requested that those defendants waive service of the summons and directed the Clerk of Court to notify the Department of Corrections and the New York City Law Department.

Judge Analisa Torres certified that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without paying fees for purposes of an appeal.

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.