Hayes v. 48-52 South 2nd Ave. L.L.C.
- Laura Swain
- 1:23-cv-03705
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 6
In Hayes v. John Doe, Judge Swain dismissed the action after finding no alleged state-government involvement, declining state-law jurisdiction, and denying further amendment.
Henry C. Hayes III's federal constitutional claims and any state-law claims against his unidentified landlord, John Doe, were dismissed; the court also denied another opportunity to amend and denied fee-waiver status for an appeal.
What happened
In Henry C. Hayes III v. John Doe, the plaintiff alleged that serious problems in his rented apartment went unrepaired for years, including leaking and collapsing ceilings, broken appliances, and a damaged bathroom door. He also alleged that people who broke into the apartment assaulted him, causing concussions and job loss.
The court treated the complaint as raising constitutional claims under a federal civil-rights law and possible state-law claims. It ruled that the landlord appeared to be a private person and that the plaintiff had not alleged facts showing the landlord acted for the state, as required for the federal claims. The plaintiff also had not provided facts showing that the parties were citizens of different states for federal diversity jurisdiction.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain dismissed the federal claims for failure to state a claim, declined to consider the possible state-law claims under supplemental jurisdiction, and alternatively dismissed those claims for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. She denied another opportunity to amend, directed entry of judgment, and denied fee-waiver status for an appeal because the appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Hayes v. 48-52 South 2nd Ave. L.L.C. · No. 1:23-cv-03705
- Laura Swain
- Oct. 10, 2023
Background
The court had previously dismissed the action for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction but gave Henry C. Hayes III, who was representing himself and proceeding without paying filing fees, 60 days to file an amended complaint. The court instructed him to allege facts establishing federal jurisdiction, including facts about the citizenship of the parties if he was asserting state-law claims under diversity jurisdiction.
Hayes filed an amended complaint naming his unidentified landlord as “John Doe.” He alleged that he rented an apartment in Mount Vernon, New York, between June 2018 and June 2021 or 2022. According to the complaint, the tenant who lived there before him warned him about leaks in the bedroom and front room. About four years later, the ceilings in those rooms collapsed. Hayes also alleged that the refrigerator, freezer, stove, and oven did not work; that the bathroom door came off its hinges; and that the landlord ignored his repair requests for three years.
Hayes further alleged that the apartment’s front door was broken into several times. Although the door was repaired, he said that people who broke into the apartment assaulted him, causing multiple concussions and resulting in the loss of his job.
Federal claims
The court construed the amended complaint as asserting claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for violations of federal constitutional rights. A claim under Section 1983 requires allegations that a constitutional or federal-law right was violated by someone acting under the authority of state law, commonly called a “state actor.”
The court held that Hayes had not stated such a claim. It found that the landlord appeared to be a private individual and that Hayes had not alleged facts showing the landlord acted under color of state law. The court therefore dismissed the federal constitutional claims for failure to state a claim under the federal statute governing dismissal of claims filed without paying filing fees.
State-law claims and jurisdiction
The court declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over any state-law claims after dismissing all claims over which it had original federal jurisdiction. Supplemental jurisdiction is a federal court’s authority to hear related state-law claims along with federal claims; the court explained that it generally declines that authority when the federal claims leave the case at an early stage.
The court also alternatively dismissed any state-law claims Hayes intended to bring under diversity jurisdiction. Hayes appeared to allege that he was a New York citizen, but he did not allege the defendant’s state citizenship. The mailing address he provided for the landlord did not establish citizenship, so the court concluded that the complaint did not show that the parties were citizens of different states.
Amendment and disposition
Because Hayes had already been given an opportunity to correct the defects in his original complaint and had not cured them, the court denied another opportunity to amend. The court dismissed the action, specifically dismissing the federal claims for failure to state a claim, declining to consider the state-law claims under supplemental jurisdiction, and alternatively dismissing those claims for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. It directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment.
The court also certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Hayes permission to proceed without paying filing fees for purposes of an appeal.
Read the full 6-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.