Bettis v. Metropolitan Correction Center
- Katharine Parker
- 1:21-cv-07496
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 14
In Bettis v. Metropolitan Correctional Center, Judge Caproni dismissed claims against two defendants, ordered service on others, and required identification of Doe defendants.
Zubearu Bettis; the Metropolitan Correctional Center and the Bureau of Prisons North East Region Director, whose claims were dismissed; L. N’Diaye, Lt. Perez, Dr. Beaudoin, Walkes, and Bullock, who were subject to service; and the unidentified Facility Director MCC NY and Jane Doe physician assistant, whose identities were ordered disclosed.
What happened
In Bettis v. Metropolitan Correctional Center, Zubearu Bettis, who was incarcerated, alleged that employees of the Metropolitan Correctional Center violated his constitutional rights. The court allowed him to proceed without paying court fees in advance and reviewed his complaint as required for prisoner cases.
The court dismissed Bettis’s claims against the Metropolitan Correctional Center because the facility is not a person that can be sued under the law discussed in the order. It also dismissed his claims against the Bureau of Prisons North East Region Director because Bettis did not allege that this defendant was personally involved. Claims against L. N’Diaye, Lt. Perez, Dr. Beaudoin, Walkes, and Bullock were allowed to proceed to service, and the court ordered the U.S. Marshals Service to serve them.
The court also ordered the United States Attorney’s Office to identify the Facility Director MCC NY and Jane Doe, a physician assistant, so Bettis could file an amended complaint naming them. Judge Valerie Caproni extended the service deadline until 90 days after summonses are issued and denied fee-free status for any appeal from the order.
The detailed version
- Bettis v. Metropolitan Correction Center · No. 1:21-cv-07496
- Katharine Parker
- Oct. 4, 2021
Background
Zubearu Bettis filed this pro se action—meaning he was representing himself—alleging that defendants violated his constitutional rights while he was detained at the Metropolitan Correctional Center. The court had already allowed him to proceed without paying the filing fee in advance. Because Bettis was proceeding without prepaying the fee and was a prisoner, the court screened his complaint under the Prison Litigation Reform Act. Screening requires dismissal of claims that are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a legally sufficient claim, seek money from an immune defendant, or fall outside the court’s subject-matter jurisdiction.
The court construed Bettis’s claims against federal employees as claims under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, a framework for certain constitutional claims against federal officials. The opinion does not describe the underlying events or specify the particular constitutional violations Bettis alleged.
Claims Dismissed
The court dismissed Bettis’s claims against the Metropolitan Correctional Center because the facility is not a “person” that can be sued under the legal framework discussed in the order.
The court also dismissed the claims against the Bureau of Prisons North East Region Director for failure to state a claim. Bettis did not allege facts showing that this defendant was personally involved in the events underlying the claims. The court explained that a supervisor cannot be held liable merely because the supervisor employs or oversees someone who allegedly violated a plaintiff’s rights.
Service on Other Named Defendants
The court ordered service of the complaint on L. N’Diaye, identified in the caption as the warden of the Metropolitan Correctional Center; Lt. Perez; Dr. Beaudoin; Walkes, identified as a counselor; and Bullock, identified as a counselor. Because Bettis was proceeding without prepaying the filing fee, the Clerk of Court was directed to issue summonses and prepare the required service forms for the U.S. Marshals Service.
The court extended the service deadline until 90 days after the summonses are issued. It also stated that Bettis should request an extension if service is not completed within that period. Bettis was required to notify the court of any address change.
Unidentified Defendants
The court found that Bettis had provided enough information for the Metropolitan Correctional Center to identify the Facility Director MCC NY and Jane Doe, a physician assistant. It ordered the United States Attorney’s Office to determine their identities, badge numbers, and service addresses within 60 days of the order.
Within 30 days after receiving that information, Bettis must file an amended complaint naming those defendants. The amended complaint will replace, rather than supplement, the original complaint. The court stated that it would screen the amended complaint after it was filed and decide whether additional service directions were needed.
Disposition
The court directed the Clerk of Court to issue summonses and service materials for the five named defendants whose claims were not dismissed, and to send the order and complaint to the United States Attorney’s Office. The court certified that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without prepaying fees for purposes of an appeal. Judge Valerie Caproni signed the order.
Read the full 14-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.