Brown v. The City of New York

Background

Arthur Lamar Brown filed a self-represented lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal law allowing claims for violations of constitutional rights by officials acting under state law. He also asserted claims under state law. The opinion states that Brown was detained at the North Infirmary Command on Rikers Island. The court had already allowed him to proceed without prepaying filing fees.

Service and Identification of Unnamed Defendants

The court requested that the City of New York and ten named individual defendants waive service of summons. The court also directed the New York City Law Department, as the attorney and agent for the Department of Correction, to identify three Jane Doe adjudication captains whom Brown sought to sue. The Law Department must provide each person’s identity, badge number, and address for service within 60 days.

Within 30 days after receiving that information, Brown must file an amended complaint naming the Doe defendants. The amended complaint will replace, rather than supplement, the original complaint. The court stated that it will screen the amended complaint after it is filed.

Timeliness Order

Brown alleged that some events occurred between May 2019 and the present. The court explained that § 1983 claims in New York generally have a three-year limitations period and generally accrue when the plaintiff knows or has reason to know of the injury. Based on the filing date stated in the opinion, the court determined that claims arising from events before June 30, 2020, appear untimely.

The court also discussed possible grounds for extending the limitations period, including equitable tolling in compelling circumstances and certain statutory tolling provisions. The court found that Brown had not provided facts supporting equitable tolling. It did not dismiss the potentially untimely claims in this order. Instead, it directed Brown to show cause within 30 days why his § 1983 claims based on events before June 30, 2020, should not be dismissed as time-barred, and to provide facts showing that the claims are timely or that tolling should apply.

Preliminary Injunctive Relief

Brown submitted a proposed order to show cause seeking a preliminary injunction and temporary restraining order. Preliminary injunctive relief is an extraordinary court order generally requiring a showing of likely irreparable harm and either a likelihood of success or sufficiently serious questions on the merits combined with a favorable balance of hardships.

The court concluded that Brown’s submissions did not show a likelihood of success on the merits or sufficiently serious questions combined with the required balance of hardships. Judge Jessica G. L. Clarke therefore denied the request for an order to show cause and preliminary injunctive relief without prejudice to renewal at a later date.

Other Orders

The court informed Brown about a New York Legal Assistance Group clinic that may provide limited-scope assistance to people representing themselves in civil cases. The clinic is not part of the court. Finally, the court certified that an appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without prepaying fees for that appeal.

Disposition

The order requests waiver of service, directs assistance in identifying the Doe defendants, requires Brown to respond regarding possible time bars, and denies the request for preliminary injunctive relief without prejudice. It does not make a final decision on the underlying constitutional or state-law claims.