Mamatkulov v. City University of New York
- John Cronan
- 1:22-cv-04131
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Mamatkulov v. City University of New York, Judge Cronan dismissed the amended complaint, denied another amendment, and closed the case.
Lazizjon Mamatkulov’s amended claims against the City University of New York were dismissed, and he was denied another opportunity to amend and permission to proceed without paying appeal fees.
What happened
In Mamatkulov v. City University of New York, Lazizjon Mamatkulov, representing himself, filed an amended complaint against the City University of New York. He alleged problems with financial-aid distribution, wrongful expulsion based on plagiarism and cheating accusations, and violations involving disability, race, and national origin. He sought reinstatement.
The court said the amended complaint did not fix the problems identified in the original complaint. It did not provide facts showing that Mamatkulov was expelled because of a disability or explain what the disability was. The court also said the Eleventh Amendment barred his equal-protection and procedural-due-process claims under a federal civil-rights statute against the City University of New York.
Judge Cronan dismissed the amended complaint, denied permission to amend again, directed the clerk to enter judgment and close the case, and denied permission to proceed without paying fees on appeal.
The detailed version
- Mamatkulov v. City University of New York · No. 1:22-cv-04131
- John Cronan
- Dec. 1, 2022
Background
Lazizjon Mamatkulov proceeded without an attorney. The court had previously dismissed his original complaint and allowed him to file an amended complaint. The earlier complaint had been understood to assert disability-discrimination claims under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, as well as equal-protection and procedural-due-process claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal civil-rights statute.
Mamatkulov’s amended complaint named the City University of New York as the only defendant. He alleged that Hunter College did not distribute his financial aid properly, that he was working 60 hours, and that he was wrongfully expelled. He also alleged that the university accused him of plagiarism and cheating even though he had not engaged in plagiarism. The complaint stated that his disability, race, and national origin had been violated and requested reinstatement.
Court’s Analysis
The court concluded that the amended complaint did not cure the defects in the original complaint. As to disability discrimination, the court said Mamatkulov again failed to allege facts showing that his expulsion was because of a disability or identifying the disability and the life activities it limited.
As to the equal-protection claims under Section 1983, the court held that the Eleventh Amendment barred the claims against the City University of New York, and Mamatkulov had not added another defendant. The court construed the amended complaint as also asserting procedural-due-process claims under Section 1983 concerning the denial of financial aid and the expulsion. It held that the Eleventh Amendment likewise barred those claims against the City University of New York.
Disposition
Judge John P. Cronan dismissed the amended complaint. Because Mamatkulov had already been given an opportunity to amend and had not remedied the defects, the court denied leave to amend a second time. The clerk was directed to enter judgment and close the case. The court also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without paying fees for purposes of an appeal.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.