Reed v. City of New York

Background

Calvin Reed, who was incarcerated at Fishkill Correctional Facility, brought this action without a lawyer under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He alleges that defendants violated his federal constitutional rights when he was detained in the custody of the New York City Department of Correction and was locked inside a Department of Correction van. The defendants listed in this action are the City of New York and John and Jane Doe defendants numbered 1 through 5.

The claims arose from a prior related proceeding. In that earlier round of the case, the court directed the Clerk of Court to separate Reed’s claims concerning the van incident and open them as a new civil action. The new action was opened on December 8, 2022. The court had already granted Reed permission to proceed without paying the filing fee in advance, although the order noted that prisoners remain responsible for the filing fee under federal law.

Order concerning the City

The court directed the Clerk of Court to notify the New York City Department of Correction and the New York City Law Department of the order. It requested that the City of New York waive service of summons. The court also directed the Clerk to mail the order and complaint to the Law Department and to send Reed an information package.

Identification of unnamed defendants

The court applied the rule that a self-represented litigant is entitled to the district court’s assistance in identifying a defendant. It found that Reed had provided enough information for the Department of Correction to identify the correction officers who transported him between West Facility and the North Infirmary Command during August 2020.

The court ordered the New York City Law Department, as the attorney for and agent of the Department of Correction, to determine the identity and badge number of each unnamed defendant Reed seeks to sue and the address where each person can be served. The Law Department must provide that information to Reed and the court within 60 days of the order. The order also specifies different service information depending on whether a Doe defendant is a current or former Department of Correction employee or official, or instead works or worked at a Department of Correction facility without holding that status.

Amended complaint and next steps

Within 30 days after receiving the identification information, Reed must file an amended complaint naming the Doe defendant or defendants. The amended complaint will replace, rather than supplement, the original complaint. After Reed files it, the court will screen the amended complaint and may issue a further order concerning service.

Disposition

The order is an order of service and does not decide the merits of Reed’s constitutional claims. Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr. ordered the identification process, requested waiver of service by the City, and required Reed to file an amended complaint after receiving the requested information.