Hayes v. Doe

Background

Henry C. Hayes, proceeding without a lawyer, filed this action against “John Doe/Landlord.” He invoked federal-question jurisdiction and diversity-of-citizenship jurisdiction. He alleged that he lived in substandard housing conditions from June 18, 2018, through June 18, 2021, and claimed that he was subjected to “cruel and unusual punishment” in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. He sought $163,000 in damages.

The court described an earlier round of litigation arising from the same events. In that earlier proceeding, the court explained that the alleged landlord was not a state actor for purposes of a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and that Hayes had not shown the parties’ citizenships were diverse. Hayes then filed this action, identifying the defendant as “John Doe/Landlord.” He alleged that the defendant was a citizen of New Jersey but provided a Mount Vernon, New York, address. The attached lease listed 48-52 South 2nd Avenue LLC as the apartment’s “Owner/Agent,” while Hayes had handwritten a New Jersey post-office-box address next to it.

Court’s analysis

Because Hayes was allowed to proceed without prepaying filing fees, the court was required to screen the complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). The court explained that it must dismiss a complaint that is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim for relief, or seeks money from an immune defendant. It must also dismiss claims when it lacks subject-matter jurisdiction, meaning the court lacks legal authority to hear them. Although courts interpret filings by people without lawyers liberally, those filings still must provide enough facts to make a claim plausible.

The court dismissed any federal claims under § 1983 because the defendant was a private actor and the complaint did not allege that the defendant acted under color of state law. In general, that requirement means the defendant must have used power provided by state law or acted with state authority. The court therefore concluded that Hayes had not stated a federal civil-rights claim.

The court separately addressed any state-law claims based on diversity jurisdiction. Diversity jurisdiction generally requires the plaintiff and defendant to be citizens of different states, and the plaintiff must allege facts showing complete diversity. For an individual, citizenship generally depends on domicile; for a limited liability company, citizenship depends on the citizenship of each member. The court found that Hayes had not alleged facts establishing the citizenship of the John Doe defendant. The differing addresses and Hayes’s allegation that the defendant was a New Jersey citizen did not supply those missing facts, particularly because the lease identified an LLC that Hayes had not named as a defendant and whose members he did not identify.

Disposition

The court dismissed the complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) and (iii), denied leave to amend because it found that amendment would be futile, and directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment. The court warned that further duplicative litigation about these events could result in an order requiring Hayes to show why he should not be barred from filing new actions without paying filing fees unless he first obtained permission. The court also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal.