Kellier v. MMS

Background

Joshua Kellier proceeded without a lawyer and filed the case without paying the filing fee. He brought claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a statute that allows claims for violations of federal rights by persons acting under state law. After the court directed him to amend his original complaint, Kellier filed an amended complaint.

The amended complaint alleged, among other things, that Manhattan Mini Storage (MMS) breached a contract by evicting him from a storage unit; that Human Resource Administration (HRA) discriminated against him and changed the method of storage-payment benefits without notice; that an HRA employee forced him out of a Bronx facility; that MMS and the Office of Temporary Disability Assistance (OTDA) conspired to deny him due process and benefits; that OTDA failed to decide a matter within 45 days; and that employees of Fedcap and the New York City Parks Department discriminated against him. He also referred to custody-related relief, the Convention Against Torture, and the Eighth Amendment.

Court’s analysis

The court screened the complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B), which requires dismissal of a fee-waived complaint that is frivolous, fails to state a claim, or seeks money from an immune defendant. The court also noted that it must dismiss a case when it lacks subject-matter jurisdiction and that it must read filings by people without lawyers liberally.

For the MMS defendants, the court held that Kellier did not allege facts showing that MMS and HRA acted together to violate his constitutional rights. Because the court had previously determined that the MMS defendants were not state actors for purposes of § 1983, it dismissed Kellier’s federal claims against them.

The court treated Kellier’s benefits allegations as a procedural due-process claim under the Fourteenth Amendment. It held that he did not allege that state courts were unavailable to challenge an adverse benefits decision. The alleged failure to follow state or city procedures therefore did not, by itself, establish a federal due-process violation, and the court dismissed that claim.

The court construed Kellier’s race-discrimination allegations as a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1981, which protects the right to make and enforce contracts without racial discrimination. The court held that Kellier offered only the conclusion that defendants acted against him because he is Black and did not allege facts connecting any defendant to a discriminatory action. It therefore found that he failed to state a § 1981 claim.

The court also held that the custody-related provisions Kellier cited did not apply. It stated that he was not in custody for purposes of the federal custody-challenge statute; that the Convention Against Torture concerns removal or return to another country, which was not at issue; and that the Eighth Amendment applies to people who are convicted and incarcerated, while Kellier was neither convicted nor incarcerated according to the opinion.

Kellier added several defendants connected with Pathway Careers, Avant Business Services, Blink Fitness, the New York City Parks Department, Fedcap, and New York City’s 311 system. Because he did not state claims against those defendants and their proposed claims went beyond the limited permission the court had given to amend, the court declined to grant leave to assert those claims.

Disposition

The court dismissed the complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii), with leave to replead the assault claim. It granted Kellier 30 days to provide facts supporting the allegation that a John Doe HRA employee forced him out of a Bronx facility. The court limited that amendment to the assault claim and stated that it would summarily dismiss any reasserted claims that had been dismissed.

The court denied as moot Kellier’s motions at docket numbers 13 and 17 and directed the Clerk to terminate any other motions in the case.