Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 15, 2022

Osias v. Department of Correction

Judge
Paul Engelmayer
Docket
1:22-cv-00869
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
Civil RightsSection 1983Pro SeCivil Procedure
In one sentence

Osias v. Department of Correction: Judge Engelmayer dismissed claims against the Department without prejudice, ordered discovery, and denied fee-free appeal status.

Who this affects

Ruddy Osias’s claims against the New York City Department of Correction were dismissed without prejudice; the order also imposed discovery obligations on the remaining defendants and denied fee-free status for an appeal.

What happened

In Osias v. Department of Correction, Ruddy Osias, representing himself, brought a civil-rights case under federal law. He alleged excessive force and deliberate indifference to serious medical needs during his detention at the Anna M. Kross Center.

The court dismissed Osias’s claims against the New York City Department of Correction because the agency cannot be sued in its own name, but allowed him to pursue those claims against the City of New York. The court also ordered the defendants to answer standard discovery requests within 120 days after receiving the complaint.

Judge Paul A. Engelmayer ruled that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without paying fees for an appeal. The order did not dismiss the claims against the other defendants.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Osias v. Department of Correction · No. 1:22-cv-00869
Judge
Paul Engelmayer
Date
Mar. 15, 2022

Background

Ruddy Osias, who was detained at the Vernon C. Bain Center, filed this case without a lawyer under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He asserted claims for excessive force and deliberate indifference to serious medical needs based on events during his detention at the Anna M. Kross Center. The court had previously allowed him to proceed without paying the filing fee in advance.

Screening of the Complaint

The court reviewed the complaint under the prisoner-screening statutes, which require dismissal of claims that are frivolous, malicious, inadequately pleaded, or seek money from a defendant protected from such relief.

The court dismissed Osias’s claims against the New York City Department of Correction. It held that the Department, as an agency of the City of New York, cannot be sued in its own name. The court dismissed those claims without prejudice to Osias’s right to pursue them against the City of New York.

Discovery and Service

The court ruled that Local Civil Rule 33.2 applies to this case. That rule requires defendants in certain prisoner cases to respond to specified court-ordered discovery requests. The defendants must serve responses to those requests within 120 days after service of the complaint and must quote each request verbatim. The court requested that the remaining defendants waive service of summons and directed the Clerk of Court to send Osias the order and an information package.

Appeal-Fee Ruling

The court certified that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied permission to proceed without paying fees for purposes of an appeal.

Disposition

The court dismissed the claims against the New York City Department of Correction without prejudice, ordered the specified discovery process, and denied fee-free status for an appeal.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.