Booker v. NYS DOCCS

Background

Diquan Booker, who appeared without a lawyer and was incarcerated at the Washington Correctional Facility, sued the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision (DOCCS) and Correctional Sergeant Sefman for damages. The court construed his complaint as asserting claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Booker alleged that the defendants failed to protect him from an attempt on his life by other prisoners and from being infected with COVID-19 while he was incarcerated at Woodbourne Correctional Facility.

The court had previously granted Booker permission to proceed without prepaying the filing fee. Because Booker was a prisoner seeking relief against governmental defendants, the court screened the complaint under the Prison Litigation Reform Act. That screening required dismissal of claims that were frivolous, malicious, inadequately pleaded, sought money from an immune defendant, or otherwise fell outside the court’s jurisdiction.

Ruling on DOCCS

The court dismissed Booker’s claims against DOCCS under Eleventh Amendment immunity. The court stated that DOCCS is an agency of New York State and therefore an arm of the state. It also stated that Congress had not removed New York’s immunity for § 1983 claims and that New York had not waived its immunity to federal-court suits. The court dismissed the claims against DOCCS for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction and because Booker sought monetary relief from a defendant immune from that relief.

Service and discovery involving Sergeant Sefman

The court did not dismiss the claims against Sergeant Sefman in this order. Because Booker was allowed to proceed without prepaying fees, the court directed the U.S. Marshals Service to serve her. The Clerk of Court was ordered to issue a summons, complete a U.S. Marshals Service process form with her service address, and provide the Marshals Service with the documents needed to serve the summons and complaint.

The court extended the time for service until 90 days after the summons for Sergeant Sefman was issued. It also directed Sergeant Sefman to comply with Local Civil Rule 33.2 by responding to specified interrogatories and document requests within 120 days after service of the complaint. Booker was required to notify the court in writing if his address changed.

Other disposition

Judge Nelson S. Roman certified that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied Booker permission to proceed without prepaying fees for an appeal. The order also directed the Clerk’s Office to mail Booker an information package and a copy of the order.

Effect of the order

This was a prisoner-complaint screening and service order. It ended Booker’s claims against DOCCS, while the order directed service and further proceedings concerning Sergeant Sefman; it did not decide the underlying failure-to-protect allegations against her.