Barnes v. New York State
- Laura Swain
- 1:23-cv-01138
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 12
In Barnes v. New York State, Judge Swain dismissed Barnes’s damages suit but held the case open 30 days for possible amendment seeking prospective relief.
Jermaine Barnes’s federal damages claims against New York State were dismissed, while the case remained open for 30 days for a possible amended request for prospective relief against a state official.
What happened
In Barnes v. New York State, Jermaine Barnes, representing himself, sought $1.5 million from New York State for confinement in prison and jail after he says he had completed his criminal sentence. He alleged that he was held in several facilities during 2018 and 2019 and that his earlier claim against New York State had been dismissed.
The court dismissed the federal damages claims because the Eleventh Amendment generally prevents suing a state in federal court, and neither Congress nor New York had removed that protection for these claims. The court did not enter judgment immediately. Instead, it kept the case open for 30 days so Barnes could potentially file an amended complaint seeking forward-looking court orders against responsible state officials.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain ordered that any amended complaint replace the original and identify the relevant people, events, injuries, and requested relief. She also denied Barnes permission to proceed without prepaying fees for an appeal, finding that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Barnes v. New York State · No. 1:23-cv-01138
- Laura Swain
- Feb. 22, 2023
Background
Jermaine Barnes, appearing without a lawyer, alleged that he was a civil detainee at the Central New York Psychiatric Center. He brought a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 seeking $1.5 million in damages from New York State. He alleged that he was confined at Clinton Correctional Facility, Green Haven Correctional Facility, and Rikers Island Jail during 2018 and 2019, after he had fully served his criminal sentence. Barnes stated that a tort claim against New York State concerning this confinement had been dismissed on September 26, 2022.
The court had previously allowed Barnes to proceed without prepaying the filing fee. It explained that a complaint filed without prepayment must be dismissed if it is frivolous, fails to state a legally sufficient claim, seeks money from an immune defendant, or presents claims over which the court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction. The court also noted that pleadings filed by people without lawyers are read liberally, but they still must provide enough facts to make a claim plausible.
Eleventh Amendment immunity
The court held that Barnes’s damages suit against New York State could not proceed in federal court. The Eleventh Amendment generally prevents state governments from being sued in federal court unless the state has waived its immunity or Congress has removed it. The court determined that Congress did not remove New York’s immunity when it enacted Section 1983, and that New York had not waived its immunity to this type of federal suit. The court therefore dismissed the Section 1983 claims against New York State under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(iii).
Possible amendment
The court said Barnes’s allegations could potentially be understood as asserting that he was held in punitive conditions while civilly committed, in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. State officials may be sued in their official capacities for prospective injunctive or declaratory relief—court orders requiring or declaring something about the future—even though they are generally protected from damages claims in that capacity.
The court concluded that Barnes’s allegations concerned confinement in 2018 and 2019, while he was then housed at the Central New York Psychiatric Center. It therefore said there did not appear to be a current dispute about the conditions for which he could seek an injunction. The court also stated that damages claims against New York State could be brought only in the New York Court of Claims. Nevertheless, it held the matter open for 30 days to allow Barnes to replead, if appropriate, claims for prospective injunctive or declaratory relief against a state official.
Disposition
The court dismissed the complaint based on New York State’s Eleventh Amendment immunity. It directed the Clerk of Court not to enter judgment and to keep the matter open for 30 days. Any amended complaint had to be submitted to the court’s Pro Se Intake Unit, identified as an amended complaint, and use docket number 23-CV-1138. It had to replace the original complaint rather than supplement it. The court stated that, if Barnes did not comply and could not show good cause, it would enter judgment based on New York State’s immunity.
The court also certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Barnes permission to proceed without prepaying fees for purposes of an appeal.
Read the full 12-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.