Moss v. City of New York
- Paul Engelmayer
- 1:23-cv-01632
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Moss v. City of New York, Judge Engelmayer stayed the case until 30 days after a DOC investigation ends and required monthly updates.
The case is paused while the Department of Correction investigation proceeds. The City must provide progress updates every 30 days, beginning June 20, 2023, and the stay continues until 30 days after the investigation concludes.
What happened
In Andrew Moss v. the City of New York, the City asked to pause the case while the New York City Department of Correction investigated the incident underlying Moss’s claims. The City said the investigation could affect representation of individual defendants and its access to relevant documents.
The City alternatively requested more time to respond to the complaint. The parties had also determined that Melvine Lewis was incorrectly named and that Correction Officer Ashley Lewis was the intended defendant, according to the City’s letter.
Judge Paul A. Engelmayer granted the request to stay the case until 30 days after the investigation concludes. He directed the City to provide a progress report every 30 days, with the first report due June 20, 2023.
The detailed version
- Moss v. City of New York · No. 1:23-cv-01632
- Paul Engelmayer
- May 18, 2023
Background
The City of New York, through its lawyer, asked the court to pause the case while the New York City Department of Correction conducted an investigation into the December 28, 2021 incident underlying the complaint. The City said that the investigation concerned Andrew Moss and Officer Ashley Lewis, rather than Correction Officer Melvine Lewis. The City and Moss’s counsel confirmed that Melvine Lewis had been named incorrectly and that Ashley Lewis was the intended defendant.
The City also stated that, according to the electronic docket, no defendants other than the City had been properly served. The City’s response to the complaint was due May 22, 2023, following an earlier extension granted by the court.
Requests and stated reasons
The City requested a stay until 30 days after the Department of Correction investigation ended. It said the investigation was needed before the City’s Law Department could decide whether it could represent the individually named officers under New York General Municipal Law § 50-k. The City also said that the investigation could create a conflict if an officer were found to have violated Department of Correction procedures.
The City further stated that it lacked access to some documents, investigative notes, and interview materials while the investigation was pending. As an alternative to a stay, and with Moss’s consent, the City requested a 45-day extension of its deadline to respond to the complaint, from May 22 to July 6, 2023, and requested a corresponding deadline for individual defendants who were properly served by June 15, 2023.
Ruling
Judge Paul A. Engelmayer granted the request to stay the case until 30 days after the conclusion of the pending Department of Correction investigation. The court expected the City to conduct the investigation promptly and required the City to submit a status update every 30 days describing the investigation’s progress. The first status update was due June 20, 2023. The order records the stay as granted and does not separately state a ruling on the alternative extension request.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.