McDaniel v. The People of the City of New York
- Analisa Torres
- 1:19-cv-11265
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 5
In McDaniel v. The People of the City of New York, Judge Torres ordered service and identification of unknown officers in McDaniel’s civil-rights case.
Curtis McDaniel; the City of New York, identified as the People of the City of New York; Police Officers Christopher Zollino and Darion Brooks; the unidentified correction officers named as John Does; the New York City Law Department; and the U.S. Marshals Service.
What happened
In McDaniel v. The People of the City of New York, Curtis McDaniel, who was incarcerated and representing himself, brought a civil-rights lawsuit claiming that defendants falsely arrested him and subjected him to unconstitutional confinement conditions.
The court directed the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the City of New York and Police Officers Christopher Zollino and Darion Brooks because McDaniel had permission to proceed without prepaying fees. The court also directed the New York City Law Department to identify the correction officers named as John Does, after which McDaniel must file a third amended complaint.
Judge Analisa Torres also ordered defendants to respond to required prisoner-case discovery requests within 120 days. This order addressed service, identification of defendants, and discovery; it did not decide whether McDaniel’s claims were legally or factually correct.
The detailed version
- McDaniel v. The People of the City of New York · No. 1:19-cv-11265
- Analisa Torres
- Feb. 2, 2021
Background
Curtis McDaniel, who was incarcerated at Bare Hill Correctional Facility and represented himself, brought this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal law allowing claims for violations of constitutional rights by state or local actors. He alleged that the defendants falsely arrested him and subjected him to unconstitutional conditions of confinement. The court had previously granted him permission to proceed without prepaying the filing fee.
Service on Named Defendants
Because McDaniel was proceeding without prepaying fees, he could rely on the court and the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the defendants. The court extended the service deadline until 90 days after the summonses were issued. It instructed the Clerk of Court to prepare the required service forms, issue summonses, and provide the necessary papers to the Marshals Service for service on the City of New York, identified in the case as the People of the City of New York, Police Officer Christopher Zollino, and Police Officer Darion Brooks.
The court also directed McDaniel to notify the court in writing if his address changes and stated that the action may be dismissed if he fails to do so.
Identifying John Doe Defendants
McDaniel’s second amended complaint provided enough information for the New York City Law Department to identify the correction officers who allegedly used excessive force against him on June 18, 2019. The court ordered the Law Department to determine those officers’ identities, badge numbers, and service addresses, and to provide that information to McDaniel and the court within 60 days.
Within 30 days after receiving the information, McDaniel must file a third amended complaint naming the newly identified defendants. The third amended complaint will replace, rather than supplement, the second amended complaint. The court stated that it would screen the new complaint and, if necessary, ask defendants to waive service.
Discovery
The court held that Local Civil Rule 33.2 applies. That rule requires defendants in certain prisoner cases to answer specified interrogatories and document requests. Defendants must serve responses within 120 days of the order and must quote each discovery request verbatim in their responses.
Disposition
Judge Analisa Torres issued an order of service and related case-management directives. The order required service on the named defendants, required the Law Department to identify the John Doe defendants, required McDaniel to file a third amended complaint after receiving that information, and applied Local Civil Rule 33.2. The opinion did not decide the merits of McDaniel’s false-arrest or confinement-condition allegations.
Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.