Medina v. New York State Division of Parole

Background

Anthony Medina brought this action without a lawyer under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1985, Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Rehabilitation Act, and, as construed by the court, state law. He sought damages, declaratory relief, and injunctive relief. The court had previously granted him permission to proceed without paying filing fees and had dismissed claims against the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision, the New York State Division of Parole, Bellevue Men’s Shelter, and the New York City Department of Correction. The earlier order also dismissed claims duplicative of those in a related case and added the City of New York as a defendant.

Screening and Defendants

Because Medina was proceeding without paying fees and sought relief against governmental entities or employees, the court applied the Prison Litigation Reform Act’s screening requirements. Those requirements call for dismissal of claims that are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim, seek money from an immune defendant, or fall outside the court’s subject-matter jurisdiction. The court also stated that it must interpret filings from people without lawyers liberally.

The court again dismissed Medina’s claims against the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision, Bellevue Men’s Shelter, and the New York City Department of Correction for the reasons given in the earlier order. Because Medina clearly intended to sue the City of New York, the court construed the second amended complaint as asserting claims against the City and directed the Clerk to replace Bellevue Men’s Shelter and the New York City Department of Correction with the City in the caption. The court stated that this amendment was without prejudice to defenses the City might assert.

Service of Process

The court requested that the City of New York and Anderson, Chaplain, Copeland, Bacon, McQueen, Akpan, Liriano, E. Rivera, Dunbar, Morales, Collins, and Miller waive service of summons. For Corse-Johnson, Colter, Estwick, Carswell, Risch, and N. Rivera, the court directed the Clerk to issue summonses, complete the required U.S. Marshals Service forms, and provide the Marshals Service with the papers needed to serve them. The court extended the time to serve those defendants until 90 days after their summonses were issued and stated that Medina should request an extension if service was not completed within that period.

Disposition

Judge Vernon S. Broderick ordered dismissal of the claims against the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision, Bellevue Men’s Shelter, and the New York City Department of Correction. He directed that the City of New York be added as a defendant, ordered steps to facilitate service on other defendants, and certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith. Fee-free status was therefore denied for purposes of an appeal.