Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 2, 2021

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
Civil RightsSection 1983Civil ProcedureDiscovery
In one sentence

In Genao v. City of New York, Judge Ramos lifted a stay, extended the amendment deadline, and denied discovery requests.

Who this affects

Gabino Genao must file a second amended complaint by April 15, 2021, using Jamell Moore’s and Justin Andrews’s full names and shield numbers. The City and the correction-officer defendants must respond through the ordinary discovery process after the stay was lifted.

What happened

Gabino Genao, representing himself, sued the City of New York and several correction officers, including two initially unidentified officers, alleging violations of his constitutional rights under federal civil-rights law.

The City identified the two officers as Jamell Moore and Justin Andrews. The court had paused the case while a Department of Correction investigation was pending. Genao sought information about that investigation and video footage of the incident.

In Genao v. City of New York, Judge Edgardo Ramos lifted the pause, extended Genao’s deadline to file a second amended complaint to April 15, 2021, and instructed him to use Moore’s and Andrews’s full names and shield numbers. The judge denied Genao’s requests for discovery about the investigation and for video footage at that time.

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
Mar. 2, 2021

Background

Gabino Genao filed this civil-rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 while representing himself. He alleged that the City of New York and several correction officers violated his constitutional rights. His original complaint named two officers as John Does, meaning their identities were initially unknown.

Identification of the John Does

The court directed the City to identify the two John Does and directed Genao to amend his complaint after their identities were provided. The City identified them as correction officers Jamell Moore and Justin Andrews and provided their shield numbers. Genao later filed an amended complaint using only their last names and expressed uncertainty about whether the court had received it.

Stay and Discovery Requests

The City asked the court to pause the case while the Department of Correction investigated the incident underlying the complaint. The court granted that request through February 18, 2021. Genao requested information about the outcome of a Department of Investigation inquiry and later requested video footage of the incident. The court had denied his earlier request for information about the investigation.

Ruling

Judge Edgardo Ramos stated that the February order had not been sent to Genao and therefore extended his deadline to file a second amended complaint until April 15, 2021. The court instructed him to list Moore and Andrews using their full names and shield numbers and stated that the City had fully complied with the order identifying the John Does.

The court denied Genao’s further requests for information about the investigation and for video footage at that time. It directed him to send discovery requests to the defendants under Rules 26(b)(1) and 34 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The clerk was directed to lift the stay and mail Genao copies of the March 2 order and the earlier February 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.