Griffin v. Corporation Counsel

Background

Jeremiah Jerome Griffin filed a self-represented civil-rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 while detained at the Anna M. Kross Center on Rikers Island. He named the New York City Corporation Counsel, the New York City Department of Correction, the Legal Aid Society, the New York County Criminal Courthouse, two Legal Aid Society lawyers, two New York County Criminal Court judges, three correction officers, and a criminal defense lawyer as defendants.

Griffin alleged problems involving his criminal case, including advice from appointed lawyers, grand-jury proceedings, a speedy-trial issue, a state-court detention petition, and an appeal. He also alleged that jail officials failed to prevent another detainee from punching him, failed to take him to a dermatology appointment, denied him meals, showers, legal calls, law-library access, recreation, and social services, housed him in unsanitary and overcrowded conditions near people who had tested positive for COVID-19, and tampered with his legal mail. He sought money damages and liens on defendants’ property.

Screening standard

Because Griffin was a prisoner proceeding without prepaying the filing fee, the court screened the complaint under the Prison Litigation Reform Act. The court explained that it must dismiss claims that are frivolous, fail to state a claim, seek money from an immune defendant, or fall outside the court’s jurisdiction. Although courts read self-represented complaints liberally, a complaint must still provide enough facts to make a claim plausible.

Claims against particular defendants

The court dismissed the claims against Judges Paul McDonnell and April Newbauer. Judges are generally immune from damages claims for actions taken as part of their judicial responsibilities, and Griffin did not allege facts showing that either judge acted outside that role or without jurisdiction. The court also described those claims as frivolous under the applicable prisoner-fee statute.

The court dismissed the claims against the New York City Department of Correction and Corporation Counsel because city agencies generally are not separate entities that can be sued. The court treated the complaint as intending to assert claims against the City of New York, but found that Griffin had not alleged a city policy, custom, or practice that caused a constitutional violation. The court also declined to treat Sylvia Hinds-Radix as an individual defendant because Griffin did not allege her personal involvement.

The court dismissed the claims against the Legal Aid Society, Joanne Dwyer, and Dean Vigliano because Griffin did not allege facts showing that these private parties acted under state authority, which is required for a claim under Section 1983. The court dismissed the claims against the New York County Criminal Courthouse because a courthouse is not a person that can be sued under that statute.

Conditions of confinement and medical care

The court analyzed Griffin’s confinement allegations under the Fourteenth Amendment because he was a pretrial detainee. A conditions-of-confinement claim requires facts showing both a serious risk to health or safety and that an official intentionally imposed the condition or recklessly failed to address a known excessive risk.

The court found Griffin’s allegations about the missed dermatology appointment insufficient because he did not show that his psoriasis was objectively serious or that a defendant knowingly disregarded a serious risk. At most, the allegation suggested negligence, which is not enough for a constitutional claim. The court also found the COVID-19 allegations insufficient because Griffin did not allege that named defendants knew the other detainees had tested positive and nevertheless exposed him to that risk.

The court found that Griffin had not alleged that a defendant knew or should have known he was likely to be attacked before another detainee punched him. Regarding withheld meals, the court said the allegations might satisfy the serious-deprivation requirement but lacked details about the number and sequence of missed meals, the nutrition Griffin received, the responsible defendant, and that defendant’s knowledge of the risk. The court found that the allegations about denied recreation and social services did not state constitutional claims.

Access to courts, counsel, and mail

The court found that Griffin’s allegations about temporary denial of law-library access and legal calls did not show that a nonfrivolous legal claim was actually harmed. His general allegation that he was denied legal calls for one or two days also did not show that his opportunity to consult with counsel or prepare his criminal defense was unreasonably burdened.

The court found the mail-tampering allegation insufficient because Griffin did not describe the nature or frequency of the interference or explain why it was unjustified.

Disposition

The court dismissed Griffin’s claims against Judges McDonnell and Newbauer because they sought relief from immune defendants. It also dismissed the claims against the Department of Correction, Corporation Counsel, the Legal Aid Society, Dwyer, Vigliano, and the New York County Criminal Courthouse for failure to state a claim. The court granted Griffin 60 days to file an amended complaint concerning his confinement, access-to-courts, access-to-counsel, and mail-tampering claims, while directing him to provide specific facts about each defendant’s conduct, dates, locations, injuries, and requested relief. The amended complaint would replace the original complaint. No summons would issue at that time, and the court denied fee-free status for an appeal.