Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 1, 2024

Abdullah v. 28th Precinct

Judge
John Koeltl
Docket
1:24-cv-00124
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
6
Civil RightsSection 1983Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In ADBUL H. ABDULLAH v. 28th Precinct, Judge Koeltl dismissed the precinct, substituted New York City, and ordered service in Abdullah’s false-imprisonment case.

Who this affects

ADBUL H. ABDULLAH’s claims against the 28th Precinct were dismissed because the precinct cannot be sued separately. The case proceeds against the City of New York, Officer Brianna L. Asselta, Sergeant Timothy Purcell, and Sergeant Robert Czaplinski, who are to be served by the U.S. Marshals Service.

What happened

ADBUL H. ABDULLAH v. 28th Precinct concerns Abdullah’s claim under a federal civil-rights law that the defendants falsely imprisoned him. He was representing himself and had permission to proceed without paying court fees in advance.

The court dismissed the claims against the NYPD’s 28th Precinct because the precinct cannot be sued as a separate entity. It replaced the precinct with the City of New York, without preventing the City from raising defenses, and ordered the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the City and the three individual defendants.

Judge John G. Koeltl also extended the service period to 90 days after summonses are issued and denied fee-free status for any appeal, finding that an appeal would not be taken in good faith. The case otherwise proceeds against the City of New York, Officer Brianna L. Asselta, Sergeant Timothy Purcell, and Sergeant Robert Czaplinski.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Abdullah v. 28th Precinct · No. 1:24-cv-00124
Judge
John Koeltl
Date
Mar. 1, 2024

Background

ADBUL H. ABDULLAH, who is proceeding without a lawyer, brought a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging that the defendants falsely imprisoned him. Chief Judge Laura Taylor Swain had previously allowed him to proceed without prepaying filing fees. This order addresses initial screening and service; it does not decide whether the alleged false imprisonment occurred.

Rulings

The court dismissed Abdullah’s claims against the 28th Precinct because it is a subdivision of the New York City Police Department and does not have the legal capacity to be sued as a separate entity.

Because Abdullah clearly intended to assert claims against the City of New York, the court construed the complaint as asserting claims against the City and directed the Clerk of Court to replace the 28th Precinct with the City of New York in the caption. The court stated that this amendment was without prejudice to any defenses the City may raise.

The court directed the Clerk to issue summonses and prepare the required service forms for the City of New York, Officer Brianna L. Asselta, Sergeant Timothy Purcell, and Sergeant Robert Czaplinski. Because Abdullah was allowed to proceed without prepaying fees, the U.S. Marshals Service will carry out service. The court stated that service must occur within 90 days after summonses are issued and that Abdullah should request an extension if service is not completed in that period.

The court also instructed Abdullah to notify it in writing if his address changes. It certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without prepaying fees for purposes of an appeal.

Disposition

The court dismissed the claims against the 28th Precinct, added the City of New York as a defendant, and ordered service on the City and the three individual defendants. The order did not resolve the underlying false-imprisonment claim.

The authoritative version

Read the full 6-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.