Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Oct. 22, 2020

Genao v. City of New York

Judge
Edgardo Ramos
Docket
1:20-cv-08731
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
Section 1983Civil ProcedureDiscoveryPro Se
In one sentence

In Genao v. City of New York, Judge Ramos ordered identification of John Doe officers, set filing and discovery deadlines, and requested service waivers.

Who this affects

Gabino Genao, the two unidentified correction officers, the City of New York, the named correction officials, the New York City Law Department, and the Department of Correction.

What happened

In Genao v. City of New York, Gabino Genao, representing himself, alleged that New York City and correction officers violated his constitutional rights while he was detained at the North Infirmary Command on Rikers Island.

The court directed the New York City Law Department to identify two John Doe correction officers and provide their badge numbers and service addresses. Genao must then file an amended complaint naming them. The court also set deadlines for the defendants’ responses to standard discovery requests and requested that several named defendants waive service of the summons.

Judge Edgardo Ramos issued the order and did not decide whether Genao’s constitutional claims were valid. The court also denied him permission to proceed without paying fees for an appeal from this order.

The detailed version

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

Case
Genao v. City of New York · No. 1:20-cv-08731
Judge
Edgardo Ramos
Date
Oct. 22, 2020

Background

Gabino Genao filed a complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a law allowing claims for violations of federal constitutional rights by persons acting under state or local authority. He proceeded without a lawyer. The complaint named the City of New York, several correction officers, and two John Doe correction officers. Genao alleged that the defendants violated his constitutional rights during his detention in the North Infirmary Command on Rikers Island. The court had previously granted his request to proceed without paying filing fees.

Identifying the John Doe Defendants

The court found that Genao had provided enough information for the New York City Law Department to identify the two John Doe correction officers from the Probe Team who allegedly were present during the September 11, 2020 incident in the NIC “3rd Floor A-Post.” The court directed the Law Department, as counsel for and agent of the New York City Department of Correction, to determine the officers’ identities, badge numbers, and addresses where they could be served. It ordered the Law Department to provide that information to Genao and the court within 60 days of the order.

Genao must file an amended complaint naming the John Doe defendants within 30 days after receiving the information. The amended complaint will replace the original complaint rather than add to it. The court stated that it would screen the amended complaint and, if necessary, issue an order concerning waiver of service.

Service of Process and Discovery

The clerk was directed to notify the Department of Correction and the Law Department of the order. The court requested that the City of New York, Captain Lopez, Correction Officer Potter, NIC Warden Collins, and NIC Captain Mclain waive service of the summons.

The court also ruled that Local Civil Rule 33.2 applies. That rule requires defendants in certain prisoner cases to respond to specified, court-ordered discovery requests. The defendants must serve responses to the standard interrogatories and document requests within 120 days of the order and must quote each request verbatim in their responses.

Disposition

This was an order about identifying defendants, serving the case, and conducting initial discovery. It did not decide the merits of Genao’s constitutional claims. The court directed the Law Department to provide the John Doe defendants’ identifying and contact information within 60 days, required Genao to file an amended complaint within 30 days after receiving that information, and required the defendants to comply with Local Civil Rule 33.2 within 120 days. The court certified that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied Genao permission to proceed without paying fees for that appeal. Judge Edgardo Ramos signed the order.

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.