Washington v. Chema

Background

Jerome Washington filed this fee-free federal civil action on his own behalf and purported to act for James Howley, Gary Barkett, Daniel Campbell, Jamel Floria, and Vincent Mancuso. Washington was the only plaintiff who signed the complaint and applied to proceed without paying filing fees. The court granted that application.

The complaint named Dr. Chema, described as the “team leader,” Jacob Matthews, Dr. Klayo, Ms. Indyn, Ms. Asha, Dr. Matthew, and Dr. Raymond. The caption listed Ms. Asha twice. The complaint stated that the events occurred at Rockland Psychiatric Center and described them as officials sending inmates or prisoners home after completing conditional release or reaching their maximum time. Washington stated that he had suffered no injuries and requested $100 million and an order stopping officials from sending people to jail or prison after their conditional release or maximum time.

Claims on Behalf of Other Plaintiffs

The court held that Washington could represent only his own interests because the complaint did not allege that he was an attorney. It therefore dismissed any claims he asserted for Howley, Barkett, Campbell, Floria, and Mancuso without prejudice to those individuals bringing claims on their own behalf.

Failure to State a Claim

Because Washington was proceeding without paying filing fees, the court was required to dismiss any claim that was frivolous, malicious, failed to state a claim for relief, or sought money from an immune defendant. The court also had to dismiss a case over which it lacked subject-matter jurisdiction. It explained that even a complaint filed by a person without a lawyer must provide a short and plain statement of facts showing entitlement to relief.

The court concluded that Washington’s one-sentence description of events did not provide enough facts to state a plausible claim. It said it could not determine what legal claim Washington was asserting and dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii).

Opportunity to Amend and Disposition

The court granted Washington 30 days to replead his claims. An amended complaint had to identify the relevant people and their titles, describe what each defendant did or failed to do, state the approximate dates, times, and locations, describe Washington’s injuries, and identify the relief sought. The court stated that the amended complaint would replace, rather than supplement, the original complaint, so Washington would need to repeat any facts or claims he wanted the court to consider.

The court instructed the Clerk to keep the matter open until a civil judgment was entered. No summons would issue at that time. If Washington did not file an amended complaint within the allowed period, the court would enter judgment dismissing the complaint for the reasons stated in the order. The court also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free appeal status.

Ruling

Judge Laura Taylor Swain dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim, dismissed the claims brought on behalf of the five other plaintiffs without prejudice to their bringing claims themselves, and granted Washington 30 days’ leave to replead.