Kirton v. Westchester County Department of Corrections/Facility/Jail

Background

Savian Denzel Kirton, who was incarcerated in the Westchester County Department of Correction, filed this action without a lawyer under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He alleged that the defendants used excessive force against him and issued disciplinary tickets in retaliation for his filing of grievances. The court had already granted permission for him to proceed without paying the filing fee at the outset, although the order noted that prisoners remain responsible for the full filing fee through statutory deductions.

Screening and Defendant Amendment

Because Kirton was a prisoner proceeding without prepaying the filing fee, the court screened the complaint under the Prison Litigation Reform Act. The court explained that it had to dismiss claims that were frivolous, malicious, inadequately pleaded, sought money from an immune defendant, or fell outside the court’s jurisdiction.

The court dismissed Kirton’s claims against the “Westchester County Department of Correction/Facility/Jail.” It held that municipal departments and agencies do not have a separate legal identity allowing them to be sued under New York law. Because the complaint clearly intended to assert claims against Westchester County, the court directed the Clerk of Court to replace the department with the County of Westchester as a defendant. The court stated that this amendment was without prejudice to defenses the County might assert.

Service and Discovery

The court directed the Clerk of Court to prepare service forms, issue summonses, and provide the necessary papers to the U.S. Marshals Service for service on the County of Westchester and Correction Officer Cardillo (#1444). Because Kirton was proceeding without prepaying the filing fee, the court extended the service period until 90 days after the summonses were issued.

The court also ruled that Local Civil Rule 33.2 applies. That rule requires defendants in certain prisoner cases to respond to specified discovery requests within 120 days after service of the complaint and to quote each request verbatim in their responses.

Disposition

Judge Kenneth M. Karas dismissed Kirton’s claims against the “Westchester County Department of Correction/Facility/Jail,” directed the Clerk to add the County of Westchester as a defendant, and ordered service on the County and Officer Cardillo. The court did not decide whether Kirton’s excessive-force or retaliation allegations were legally or factually valid. It also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without prepaying fees for an appeal from this order.

Classification

This is a procedural order because the court screened the complaint, removed an improper defendant, amended the caption, and arranged service without deciding the underlying excessive-force or retaliation claims.