Brown v. The City of New York

Background

Arthur Lamar Brown, proceeding without a lawyer, filed this action against the City of New York and other defendants. Earlier in the case, the court ordered Brown to sign releases under New York Criminal Procedure Law § 160.50 and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, or HIPAA. The City had asked the court to compel Brown to sign those releases so it could obtain records relevant to defending the lawsuit.

The earlier orders also addressed several unnamed corrections officials. The City identified Adjudication Captain Jane Doe #3 as Adjudication Captain Marshall, shield number 319. The opinion states that an earlier order dismissed Brown’s claims arising from events before June 30, 2020 as time-barred and dismissed several defendants with prejudice. Those earlier rulings were not the subject of the present order.

Brown’s Requests and the Court’s Rulings

Brown asked the court to reconsider or clarify the earlier releases order, or alternatively to provide him with the City’s December 27, 2023 letter motion. He also asked for Adjudication Captain Jane Doe #3’s name and shield number and asked the City to re-serve a § 160.50 release containing enough information to identify the records sought.

The court construed the request for reconsideration as a request for clarification. Because Brown stated that he had already provided an executed HIPAA release, the court limited its discussion to the § 160.50 release. The court held that Brown must execute a § 160.50 release so the City can access its own records, but limited the release to records concerning the criminal prosecution that resulted in Brown’s custody at the New York City Department of Correction and gave rise to the allegations in the complaint. The court ordered the City to provide the specific docket and/or indictment numbers for the records sought.

The court granted Brown’s request for a copy of the City’s December 27, 2023 letter motion and attached a copy to the order. It denied as moot Brown’s request for Jane Doe #3’s name and shield number because the City had identified that official as Adjudication Captain Marshall #319. The City was relieved of further obligations under the court’s order requiring it to identify the unnamed defendant.

The court granted in part and denied in part Brown’s request that the City re-serve the § 160.50 release. No later than January 30, 2024, the City had to provide the specific docket and/or indictment numbers, re-serve the release, and file a certificate of service. Brown had to sign and return the release to the New York City Law Department no later than February 13, 2024. The court warned that failure to comply could result in a recommendation that the case be dismissed for failure to prosecute; the court did not dismiss the case in this order.

Amended Complaint

The court extended Brown’s deadline to file an amended complaint from February 22, 2024 to March 15, 2024. It stated that the amended complaint would replace the existing complaint and must include all claims Brown sought to pursue against proper defendants, along with factual allegations concerning each defendant’s challenged conduct.

Disposition

Judge Stewart D. Aaron ordered the specific relief listed above. The order was a procedural and pretrial ruling about releases, identification of a defendant, and the amended complaint; it did not decide whether Brown’s underlying claims were legally valid.