Smith v. Udayan
- Nelson Roman
- 7:21-cv-02712
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 8
In Smith v. Udayan, Judge Roman severed and transferred unrelated claims, while keeping the remaining claims in this district and ordering service.
Sincere Smith; Correction Officers J. Cordero, A. Udayan, R. Robinson, M. Davis, Jarvis, and S. Gadway; and the U.S. District Courts for the Southern and Northern Districts of New York.
What happened
In Smith v. Udayan, Sincere Smith, who is incarcerated and representing himself, brought a federal civil-rights lawsuit under Section 1983 against correction officers. He alleged that five officers at Sing Sing Correctional Facility used excessive force or failed to protect him, and that another officer at Upstate Correctional Facility sexually assaulted him.
The court found that the Sing Sing and Upstate allegations involved different defendants, events, facilities, witnesses, and evidence, so they could not proceed together in one lawsuit. It severed the claims against S. Gadway and transferred them to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York because those claims arose in Franklin County, while the Sing Sing claims remained in the Southern District of New York.
Judge Nelson S. Roman ordered the Clerk and U.S. Marshals Service to issue and serve papers on the five Sing Sing defendants, extended the service deadline to 90 days after summonses are issued, and applied a standard prisoner-discovery rule. The court also denied permission to proceed without paying fees for any appeal, certifying that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Smith v. Udayan · No. 7:21-cv-02712
- Nelson Roman
- Apr. 28, 2021
Background
Sincere Smith, who was incarcerated at Upstate Correctional Facility in Franklin County, New York, filed this action without a lawyer under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging violations of his federal constitutional rights. The court had previously allowed him to proceed without prepaying the filing fee.
Smith asserted two groups of claims. He alleged that Correction Officers J. Cordero, A. Udayan, R. Robinson, M. Davis, and Jarvis used excessive force against him or failed to protect him while he was incarcerated at Sing Sing Correctional Facility. He separately alleged that Correction Officer S. Gadway sexually assaulted him while he was at Upstate Correctional Facility.
Severance and transfer
The court applied Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 18 and 20, which govern when claims and defendants may be joined in one case, and Rule 21, which allows a court to separate claims. The court concluded that the Sing Sing and Upstate allegations involved different defendants and separate events at different facilities. The claims therefore were not logically connected under Rule 20.
The court severed the Upstate claims against Gadway from the Sing Sing claims. After severance, the court treated the claims as separate actions and considered where the Upstate claims could properly be litigated. It found that the complaint did not allege that the Upstate events occurred in the Southern District of New York or that Gadway resided there. Because the Upstate claims arose in Franklin County, which is in the Northern District of New York, the court transferred those claims to that district under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a). The Sing Sing claims remained in the Southern District of New York.
Service and discovery
Because Smith was allowed to proceed without prepaying the filing fee, the court directed the Clerk of Court and the U.S. Marshals Service to serve Cordero, Udayan, Robinson, Davis, and Jarvis. The court extended the service period to 90 days after the summonses were issued. It also instructed Smith to notify the court in writing if his address changed.
The court ruled that Local Civil Rule 33.2 applied. That rule requires defendants in certain prisoner cases to answer specified discovery requests within 120 days after service of the complaint.
Disposition
Judge Nelson S. Roman directed the Clerk to sever the Upstate claims against Gadway and transfer them to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York. The court directed issuance and service of the Sing Sing claims and applied Local Civil Rule 33.2. 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. The order addressed joinder, venue, service, and discovery; it did not decide whether Smith’s underlying constitutional allegations were valid.
Read the full 8-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.