Monroe v. County of Rockland

Background

Michael J. Monroe, who is detained at Rockland County Correctional Center, filed this action without a lawyer under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal law that allows claims for violations of constitutional rights by state or local officials. He alleges that the County of Rockland and Correction Officers John Doe #1 and John Doe #2 were deliberately indifferent to a serious risk of harm from another inmate. The court had previously allowed Monroe to proceed without prepaying the filing fee.

Service on the County

Because Monroe was allowed to proceed without prepaying fees, the court ordered the Clerk of Court to issue a summons and provide the U.S. Marshals Service with the documents needed to serve the County of Rockland. The court extended the time for service to 90 days after the summons is issued. The order states that Monroe must request an extension if service is not completed within that period. It also requires Monroe to notify the court in writing if his address changes.

Identifying the unnamed officers

The court found that Monroe had provided enough information for the Rockland County Corrections Division to identify the two correction officers who worked in the “IV room” of the Charlie Housing Unit on October 8, 2020. The court ordered the Rockland County Attorney to determine each officer’s identity, badge number, and service address and provide that information to Monroe and the court within 60 days.

Within 30 days after receiving the information, Monroe must file a second amended complaint naming the officers. That complaint will replace, rather than supplement, the existing amended complaint. The court will screen the second amended complaint and, if necessary, direct the Clerk and Marshals Service to serve the newly named defendants.

Discovery

The court ruled that Local Civil Rule 33.2 applies. Under that rule, the defendants must respond to the specified prisoner-case interrogatories and document requests within 120 days after service of the complaint, quoting each request verbatim in their responses.

Ruling and effect

This is an order concerning service, identification of defendants, amendment of the complaint, and discovery. It does not decide whether the defendants were deliberately indifferent or otherwise determine the merits of Monroe’s civil-rights allegations. The court directed the Clerk to mail the order and related materials to Monroe and the Rockland County Attorney. It certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without prepaying fees for purposes of an appeal.

Judge

The order was issued by United States District Judge Cathy Seibel.