El Dey v. Brann
- Jesse Furman
- 1:20-cv-07208
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
El Dey v. Brann: Judge Furman denied defendants’ motion to dismiss, giving El Dey a final chance to provide valid medical releases.
Abdullah Spencer El Dey and the defendants, including members of the New York City Department of Correction; the order required further action on medical releases and extended fact discovery.
What happened
In El Dey v. Brann, Abdullah Spencer El Dey, who represented himself, sued members of the New York City Department of Correction under a federal civil-rights law, alleging they failed to protect him while he was jailed on Rikers Island.
The defendants sought dismissal because El Dey had not provided usable releases allowing them to obtain his medical records. They said the releases he later submitted had a signature mismatch and included “T.D.C.,” which they understood to indicate that he was not voluntarily signing them.
Judge Jesse M. Furman denied the motion to dismiss and ordered the defendants to send El Dey clean release forms. He gave El Dey until November 22, 2021, to return valid signed releases, warned that failure could lead to a renewed dismissal motion, and extended fact discovery until 90 days after the defendants received the releases.
The detailed version
- El Dey v. Brann · No. 1:20-cv-07208
- Jesse Furman
- Oct. 20, 2021
Background
Abdullah Spencer El Dey brought a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal law allowing claims against state or local officials for violating federal rights. He alleged that several members of the New York City Department of Correction failed to protect him while he was jailed on Rikers Island.
The Court had previously ordered El Dey to sign and return medical releases authorizing the defendants to obtain his medical records. The Court warned that failing to comply could result in dismissal. The defendants moved to dismiss after they had not received the releases by July 13, 2021. El Dey later submitted signed releases to the Court.
Dispute over the releases
The defendants reported that the releases had two defects. First, they said the name El Dey printed on the signature lines did not match his signature on other documents previously submitted to NYC Health + Hospitals, which prevented that organization from verifying the signature and releasing the records. Second, they said El Dey had printed “T.D.C.” after his name and that this acronym is used by so-called “sovereign citizens” to indicate signing under threat, duress, or coercion. The opinion presents these points as the defendants’ assertions.
Ruling
Judge Furman stated that the defects and El Dey’s delay could support dismissal for failure to comply with the Court’s order. But, considering El Dey’s self-represented status and the severity of dismissal as a sanction, the Court gave him one final opportunity to correct the releases.
The Court denied the defendants’ motion to dismiss. It ordered the defendants to promptly send El Dey a clean copy of the medical releases, and ordered El Dey to provide valid, signed, defect-free releases by November 22, 2021. The Court warned that failure to meet that deadline would likely result in dismissal and would allow the defendants to renew their motion to dismiss for failure to prosecute. The Court also extended the fact-discovery deadline to 90 days after the defendants received El Dey’s releases.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.