Sterling v. The State of New York

Background

Brandon Sterling filed this self-represented action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal civil-rights statute, alleging that while he was incarcerated at Fishkill Correctional Facility, medical personnel failed to provide adequate medical treatment. The opinion states that Sterling was then incarcerated in the Sullivan County Jail. The court had allowed him to proceed without paying the filing fee at the outset.

Screening standard

Because Sterling was incarcerated and was suing governmental entities, the court screened the complaint under the Prison Litigation Reform Act. The court was required to dismiss claims that were frivolous, malicious, failed to state a legally sufficient claim, sought money from an immune defendant, or fell outside the court’s subject-matter jurisdiction. The court also explained that although self-represented complaints are read liberally, they still must provide enough facts to make a claim plausible.

Claims against New York State and DOCCS

The court dismissed Sterling’s claims against the State of New York and the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision (DOCCS). It held that the Eleventh Amendment generally bars suits against states and state instrumentalities in federal court unless the state has waived that protection or Congress has removed it. The opinion states that New York had not waived the protection and that Congress had not removed it when it enacted § 1983.

Claim against Fishkill Correctional Facility

The court also dismissed Sterling’s claim against Fishkill Correctional Facility. Section 1983 permits an action against a “person” who violates federal rights, and the court held that Fishkill Correctional Facility is not a “person” for purposes of that statute.

Unidentified medical defendants

Because Sterling did not identify the medical personnel involved, the court directed the clerk to add John Does 1–5 as defendants under Rule 21 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The court ordered the New York State Attorney General, acting as attorney and agent for DOCCS, to determine the identities and service addresses of those individuals and provide that information to Sterling and the court within 60 days of the order.

Sterling must file an amended complaint within 30 days after receiving the identifying information. The amended complaint will replace, rather than supplement, the original complaint. The court stated that it would screen the amended complaint and, if necessary, direct service through the U.S. Marshals Service.

Disposition

The court dismissed Sterling’s claims against the State of New York and DOCCS and dismissed his claims against Fishkill Correctional Facility. It directed the clerk to add John Does 1–5 as defendants. The court also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without prepaying fees for purposes of an appeal.

Classification

This is a procedural order because the court resolved the identified claims during mandatory prisoner-complaint screening on immunity and proper-defendant grounds, without deciding whether the alleged medical treatment violated Sterling’s constitutional rights.