Ezekwo v. OPMC

Background

Dr. Ifeoma Ezekwo, who was representing herself, sued OPMC, which the court understood to mean the New York State Office of Professional Medical Conduct, along with numerous agencies, officials, hospitals, police officers, a judge, and other defendants. She invoked 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging violations of several constitutional amendments, and also referred to claims under Bivens, a case allowing certain constitutional claims against federal officers in limited circumstances.

The amended complaint described an OPMC proceeding that Dr. Ezekwo said was handled unfairly while she was ill. She alleged that defendants kept false information in her public professional records, shared it with the Drug Enforcement Administration, and harmed her reputation and employment opportunities. She also described an alleged assault involving her son, conduct by Englewood, New Jersey, police officers, related court proceedings, and alleged false information placed in her Medicaid record. She sought damages and orders requiring defendants to address the OPMC matter and remove the allegedly false information.

Rulings

The court dismissed the amended complaint for failure to state a claim because it did not provide the short and plain statement required by Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and did not allow the court to determine what claims Dr. Ezekwo was asserting.

The court also made the following rulings:

- It dismissed the § 1983 claims for money damages against the New York State OPMC, the New York State Department of Health, “DEA New York State,” and New York State Medicaid because the Eleventh Amendment generally protects states and state agencies from such suits in federal court. - It dismissed the claims against the United States Drug Enforcement Administration and the United States Department of Justice because Dr. Ezekwo did not identify a waiver of the federal government’s sovereign immunity. The court also stated that a Bivens claim cannot be brought against a federal agency or federal officials acting in their official capacities. - It dismissed the claims against Judge Liliana DeAvila Silebi under absolute judicial immunity because the allegations concerned actions she took while presiding over a case. Judicial immunity generally protects judges from damages suits for judicial acts, even when bad faith or malicious conduct is alleged. - It dismissed the § 1983 claims against St. Barnabas Hospital, its “Director of Medical Staff,” and Englewood Hospital because the complaint did not allege that these private parties acted under state law. - It dismissed the claims against Bill Fridell, the New York State Commissioner of Health, the New York State Inspector General, Roy Nemerson, Jonathan Rivera, Juana M. Hill, Paula Breen, and Dara Govan because the complaint did not allege their personal involvement in the claimed violations. - It declined to transfer the claims concerning the City of Englewood, the Englewood Police Department, and Christopher Quirk, Thornton White, and Michael Christiansen because the alleged events occurred in Englewood, New Jersey, and Dr. Ezekwo had previously filed related actions against the same defendants in the District of New Jersey, including one that was pending.

The court also characterized the claims as borderline frivolous and said that many factual allegations were incredible and that the legal theory was unclear. It did not, however, enter an immediate civil judgment because it granted leave to replead.

Leave to Amend and Disposition

Chief United States District Judge Laura Taylor Swain granted Dr. Ezekwo 30 days to file a second amended complaint. The new complaint had to replace, rather than supplement, the amended complaint and had to identify only defendants who were personally and directly involved, the relevant events and locations, the injuries, and the requested relief. The conclusion states that the amended complaint was dismissed for failure to state a claim and because of absolute judicial immunity, Eleventh Amendment immunity, and sovereign immunity. If Dr. Ezekwo did not timely file a second amended complaint or show good cause, the court said it would enter a civil judgment consistent with the order and terminate the matter.

The order’s opening paragraph refers to 60 days to amend, but the later amendment section and the conclusion repeatedly state a 30-day deadline.