Chabrier v. Martinez
- Gregory Woods
- 1:22-cv-06239
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
Chabrier v. Martinez: Judge Willis granted defendants’ request to stop identifying unnamed correctional and medical staff under a prior court order.
Christopher Chabrier, the City of New York, Officer Martinez, Captain Young, and the unnamed correctional officers and medical staff covered by the identification order.
What happened
In Chabrier v. Martinez, defendants—the City of New York, Officer Martinez, and Captain Young—asked the court to relieve them of an order requiring identification of unnamed correctional officers and medical staff. The order concerned alleged assaults and medical care involving Christopher Chabrier.
Defendants said they had identified some of the people covered by the order but had not identified all of them. They also reported that Chabrier had obtained a lawyer, and that defendants were working with his lawyer on additional discovery that could help identify the people he sought to sue.
Judge Jennifer E. Willis granted defendants’ request to be relieved of the identification order. The opinion does not decide the underlying allegations or claims.
The detailed version
- Chabrier v. Martinez · No. 1:22-cv-06239
- Gregory Woods
- Sept. 7, 2023
Background
Defendants—the City of New York, Officer Martinez, and Captain Young—asked the court to relieve them of an earlier order requiring them to identify unnamed correctional officers and medical staff. The order concerned individuals allegedly involved in failing to protect Christopher Chabrier from assaults, providing medical care after an assault, or showing deliberate indifference to his medical condition at two facilities.
Defendants stated that they had complied with parts of the identification order but had not identified two correctional officers from the first facility or the correctional officers from the second facility. They also stated that they had produced responses to discovery requests and that Chabrier had obtained counsel. Defendants said they had met and conferred with Chabrier’s counsel and would work to provide additional discovery that could help identify the people Chabrier sought to sue.
Request and ruling
Defendants argued that the identification procedure from Valentin v. Dinkins applies to lawsuits brought by people without lawyers, and that Chabrier was now represented by counsel. The court granted defendants’ request to be relieved of the earlier identification order. The order did not address the merits of Chabrier’s underlying allegations or claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.