Lurch, Jr. v. John Doe
- John Koeltl
- 1:22-cv-04055
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
Lurch, Jr. v. John Doe: Judge Figueredo granted defendants’ motion to compel arrest-history and medical releases by May 10, 2024.
The self-represented plaintiff and the defendant New York City police officers seeking arrest-history and medical records.
What happened
In Lurch, Jr. v. John Doe, defendants asked the court to require the plaintiff to sign releases for arrest-history records and medical records. The plaintiff, who was representing himself, brings claims concerning his detention and transportation to Bellevue Hospital and alleges mental and emotional injuries.
Defendants argued that the requested records were relevant to the plaintiff’s claims and alleged damages. The court granted the motion to compel and ordered the plaintiff to sign both releases and return them to the City by May 10, 2024.
Judge Valerie Figueredo endorsed the order on April 22, 2024. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate the motion at ECF No. 81.
The detailed version
- Lurch, Jr. v. John Doe · No. 1:22-cv-04055
- John Koeltl
- Apr. 22, 2024
Background
The plaintiff is proceeding without a lawyer. The underlying case includes claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 concerning an alleged unlawful detention under New York Mental Health Law § 9.41 and transportation to Bellevue Hospital. The plaintiff also alleges mental and emotional injuries and brings a false-arrest claim.
Defendants, represented by the New York City Law Department, stated that they had served discovery requests and releases in August and October 2023 but had not received signed releases. After an unsuccessful mediation, they asked the court to compel the plaintiff to sign a release under New York Criminal Procedure Law § 160.50 for arrest-history records and medical releases under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). They argued that the records were relevant to the plaintiff’s alleged injuries and damages.
Ruling
The court granted the motion to compel. It directed the plaintiff to execute both the § 160.50 release and the HIPAA release and return them to the City by May 10, 2024. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate the motion at ECF No. 81. The order does not state that dismissal would automatically result if the releases were not provided.
Effect
The ruling requires the plaintiff to provide the two categories of releases in the ongoing case. It resolves the discovery motion, not the underlying claims about the detention, arrest, or alleged injuries.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.