Al-Haj v. Akaukmoah

Background

Nagibe Al-Haj, who was confined at Kirby Forensic Psychiatric Center, brought a damages action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal law that permits claims against government officials for violations of constitutional rights. He proceeded without a lawyer.

The second amended complaint alleged two principal matters. First, Al-Haj alleged that Dr. Cristina Musat transferred him from one ward to another and that Musat and Sonte Taylor restricted his telephone privileges, preventing him from contacting his lawyer or the New York State Justice Center for Protection of People with Special Needs. Second, he alleged that two other patients assaulted him on June 10 and June 14, 2019, causing injuries including continuing difficulty lifting his hand.

The defendants named in the second amended complaint were Richard Akuamoah, Arthur Canton, Tyra Boone, Chrit-Yves Dabel, Emmanuel Goosby, Ronald Laporte, Duvens Lespinasse, Melvin Massy, Dr. Cristina Musat, Sonte Taylor, Shanteau Watkins, Derrick Wilder, and Denise Williams. Al-Haj alleged that Taylor participated in his transfer but made no specific allegations against the other eleven Security Hospital Treatment Assistants regarding the assaults. The two patients alleged to have assaulted him were not named as defendants.

Defendants’ Motion

The defendants moved to dismiss under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6). Rule 12(b)(1) concerns whether the court has authority to hear a case, while Rule 12(b)(6) concerns whether the complaint alleges enough facts to state a legally valid claim. The court applied a more generous reading because Al-Haj was proceeding without a lawyer, but explained that he still had to meet the basic pleading requirements.

Claims Against Musat and Taylor

The court held that the alleged transfer from one ward to another did not, by itself, establish a constitutional violation. Decisions by medical professionals about the treatment of people involuntarily committed to state custody are generally presumed valid. A claim would require allegations showing that the decision substantially departed from accepted professional judgment. Al-Haj alleged only that Musat transferred him to 4 West “for no reason” and did not allege harm from the transfer beyond the transfer itself.

The court also held that the telephone restrictions did not state a constitutional access-to-courts claim. A person in custody does not have a right to unlimited telephone access. To state such a claim, Al-Haj needed to allege that the restrictions eliminated alternative ways to communicate with counsel and actually hindered his pursuit of a nonfrivolous legal claim. The complaint did not make those allegations.

Assault Allegations

The court dismissed the claims against Akuamoah, Boone, Canton, Dabel, Goosby, Laporte, Massy, Watkins, Wilder, and Williams because Al-Haj did not allege that any of them participated in the assaults or permitted them to occur. Under Section 1983, a defendant’s personal involvement in the alleged constitutional violation is required for a damages award.

The court separately held that the claim against Lespinasse could not proceed because Lespinasse appeared in the caption but was never mentioned in the body of the complaint. Naming someone only in the caption, without a substantive allegation against that person, was insufficient.

Disposition

Judge Lewis J. Liman granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss and dismissed Al-Haj’s complaint without prejudice. The court denied the request to dismiss with prejudice, meaning permanently. It granted Al-Haj leave to file an amended complaint that complied with the opinion within 90 days of March 15, 2021. The Clerk of Court was directed to mail the opinion to Al-Haj and close the motion at Docket No. 52.