Jones v. Annucci

Background

Byron K. Brown and 29 other incarcerated individuals jointly filed a complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal law allowing certain claims against state officials for violating constitutional rights. They alleged that prisoners at Sing Sing Correctional Facility were denied the opportunity to attend religious services on April 14, 2023. The complaint was labeled a class action, but the court stated that the remaining allegations concerned only Brown.

The complaint was filed without lawyers. Only 20 of the 30 plaintiffs signed the complaint. Brown alone requested permission to proceed without prepaying the filing fee and submitted a prisoner authorization. A motion asking the court to appoint counsel was signed by 19 plaintiffs, while its supporting memorandum and declaration were signed only by Brown.

Reason for Severance

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 20 generally allows multiple plaintiffs to join one lawsuit when their claims arise from the same event or related events and share common legal or factual questions. Rule 21 allows a court to separate claims when doing so would better serve fairness, efficiency, and case management.

The court concluded that the plaintiffs’ claims arose from each person’s individual alleged denial of religious services. Although the claims were similar, each plaintiff would need to provide separate facts about when the denial occurred, how it affected that person, and what steps that person took to challenge it.

The court also found that the practical difficulties of managing a joint lawsuit involving multiple incarcerated, unrepresented plaintiffs supported separation. Because people representing themselves may appear only on their own behalf, no plaintiff could act as another plaintiff’s lawyer. Each unrepresented plaintiff would also have to personally sign motions and other filings. Transfers, releases, security restrictions, and limited communication could make it difficult for the plaintiffs to coordinate, share documents, and meet deadlines.

Order

Judge Laura Taylor Swain ordered that the plaintiffs’ claims be severed under Rule 21. Brown will proceed as the sole plaintiff in this action. The other 29 plaintiffs—Carlos Arriago, Terrence Turner, David Louime, Dennis Antwon, Robert Campbell, Gregory White, Shantee Brooks, Eligidio Lind, Teddy Williams, Hector L. DeJesus, Apolinar Roque, Ricardo Corbin, Terel Overton, Alex Martinez, Deshard Wright, Clayton Scott, Michael A. Crane, Kevin Bussey, Eric Pek, Vaughn Campbell, Ivan T. Ramos, Daniel Jones, Dwayne Reed, Ivan Seabrooks, James Scott, Alen Haymon, Alfonso A. Howard, Stephen Robinson, and Trevor Price—will each receive a new case number.

The complaint, the motion for appointment of counsel, and the order will be docketed in each new case. Each plaintiff will be directed either to pay the $402 filing fee or to submit an application to proceed without prepaying the fee and a prisoner authorization. The new cases will proceed independently, although the court noted that it could later treat them as related or consolidate them if appropriate.

The court also certified that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without prepaying the filing fee for an appeal. The order concerns how the claims will proceed; it does not decide whether the alleged denial of religious services violated the plaintiffs’ rights.