Hickman v. The City of New York

Background

Quandell Hickman, proceeding without a lawyer, brought a civil-rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the City of New York. He challenged the conditions of his pretrial detention at Rikers Island during March and April 2020. He alleged that the facilities did not adequately protect detainees from COVID-19 because they did not promote social distancing, provide personal protective equipment, or separate sick detainees. Hickman alleged that he experienced COVID-19 symptoms and other physical and emotional harm. He sought release from detention and $3 million in compensatory damages.

The City moved to dismiss, arguing that Hickman had not exhausted the administrative remedies required by the Prison Litigation Reform Act and had not adequately alleged a constitutional violation. Hickman did not file an opposition to the motion.

Exhaustion ruling

The Prison Litigation Reform Act generally requires a prisoner to complete available prison grievance procedures before bringing a federal lawsuit about prison conditions. The court explained that proper exhaustion requires using every step of the available process and following the agency’s procedural rules.

The court concluded that the complaint itself showed that Hickman had not exhausted his remedies. At the Anna M. Kross Center, Hickman acknowledged that he filed no grievance. His statement that the facility was short-staffed did not establish that the grievance process was unavailable, particularly because he was able to speak with prison officials.

At the Eric M. Taylor Center, Hickman alleged that he filed grievances, which satisfied the initial step of the applicable Inmate Grievance and Request Program for purposes of the motion. But that program required additional steps, including requesting a formal hearing if informal resolution failed and appealing through prison review authorities. Hickman did not take those steps. His statement that he called 311 was not an appeal of the grievance decision.

Disposition

The court granted the City’s motion to dismiss on the ground that Hickman failed to exhaust available administrative remedies. It did not evaluate whether the complaint plausibly alleged a constitutional violation or whether a City policy or custom caused the alleged violation. The opinion states that the complaint should be dismissed with prejudice because Hickman was no longer in state custody and therefore could not use the required grievance process. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the case.

Judge

The memorandum opinion and order was issued by Ronnie Abrams, United States District Judge.