Turane v. The Department of Corrections and Community Supervision

Background

Trumaine Turane appears without a lawyer and is currently incarcerated at Gouverneur Correctional Facility. He brought claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal law that allows claims for violations of federal constitutional or statutory rights by persons acting under state authority. He sought damages, declaratory relief, and injunctive relief.

Turane named the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision (DOCCS), New York State, individual DOCCS officials assigned to offices in Albany, and the Five Points, Cape Vincent, and Gouverneur Correctional Facilities. His claims concerned the revocation of his parole and alleged inadequate medical treatment while incarcerated. The court noted that he did not identify which defendants allegedly violated his federal rights or where the alleged violations occurred.

The court had granted Turane permission to proceed without paying the filing fee upfront on January 14, 2021. It explained that federal law requires screening of a prisoner’s complaint against governmental entities or officials and requires dismissal of claims that are frivolous, malicious, inadequately pleaded, seek relief from an immune defendant, or fall outside the court’s jurisdiction.

Dismissed Claims

The court dismissed the § 1983 claims against DOCCS and New York State based on Eleventh Amendment immunity. That doctrine generally protects states and state instrumentalities from federal lawsuits. The court found that Congress had not removed New York’s immunity for § 1983 claims, New York had not waived that immunity, and DOCCS was an arm of New York State.

The court also dismissed the § 1983 claims against the Five Points, Cape Vincent, and Gouverneur Correctional Facilities for failure to state a claim. To proceed under § 1983, a plaintiff must allege both a violation of a federal right and action by a person acting under state authority. The court held that correctional facilities are not persons for purposes of § 1983 liability.

Remaining Claims and Possible Transfer

The remaining claims were against individual DOCCS officials assigned to offices in Albany County. The court determined that venue—the proper federal district for a lawsuit—was available in the Southern District of New York because Turane alleged that he pursued state-court remedies in Bronx County and before the Appellate Division, First Department, which are located in that district. The court also stated that venue was proper in the Northern District of New York based on the officials’ locations and might be proper in the Northern and Western Districts of New York based on where events occurred.

Under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), a court may transfer a case for the convenience of the parties and witnesses and in the interest of justice. The court stated that Turane’s remaining claims appeared to arise from decisions and actions by the individual officials in Albany, making transfer to the Northern District of New York appropriate. It directed Turane to file a declaration within 30 days explaining why the remaining claims should not be transferred. The court stated that it would transfer those claims if he did not respond. The court also stated that it would not rule on pending motions until he complied with the order.

Disposition

The court dismissed Turane’s claims against DOCCS, New York State, and the Five Points, Cape Vincent, and Gouverneur Correctional Facilities. It did not yet transfer the remaining claims; it ordered Turane to show cause within 30 days why those claims should not be transferred to the Northern District of New York.