Flores v. The State of New York
- Ronnie Abrams
- 1:24-cv-02969
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 6
In Flores v. The State of New York, Judge Abrams dismissed claims against New York and DOCCS, while ordering service on Officer Montigny and identification of John Doe.
John Andrew Flores’s claims against New York State and DOCCS were dismissed, while his claims involving Officer S. Montigny and the unidentified Officer John Doe remained subject to service and further screening.
What happened
In Flores v. The State of New York, John Andrew Flores, representing himself, alleged that a parole officer assaulted him and that another officer failed to intervene. He brought the case under a federal civil-rights law while detained at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn.
The court dismissed Flores’s claims against New York State and the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision because the Eleventh Amendment barred those claims. It ordered the U.S. Marshals Service to serve Officer S. Montigny and directed the New York Attorney General to identify the officer currently called John Doe.
Judge Ronnie Abrams also ordered discovery procedures for the case and denied permission to proceed without paying fees for any appeal, finding that an appeal would not be taken in good faith. The claims against Officer Montigny and the unidentified officer were not dismissed in this order.
The detailed version
- Flores v. The State of New York · No. 1:24-cv-02969
- Ronnie Abrams
- May 1, 2024
Background
John Andrew Flores, proceeding without a lawyer, brought a case under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging that a parole officer assaulted him. The opinion states that Flores was detained at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn, New York. He named the State of New York, the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision (DOCCS), Officer S. Montigny, and an unidentified Officer John Doe as defendants. Flores alleged that Officer John Doe failed to intervene when Officer Montigny assaulted him on September 9, 2022.
The court had previously granted Flores permission to proceed without prepaying the filing fee. Because he was proceeding without prepayment, the court screened the complaint under federal statutes requiring dismissal of claims that are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim, seek money from an immune defendant, or fall outside the court’s jurisdiction.
Rulings
The court dismissed Flores’s claims against the State of New York and DOCCS. It held that the Eleventh Amendment generally protects states and state instrumentalities from suits in federal court, that New York had not waived that protection, and that Congress had not removed it through Section 1983. The opinion identifies DOCCS as an arm of New York State.
The court did not dismiss the claims against Officer S. Montigny in this order. Instead, it directed the Clerk of Court to issue a summons and provide the necessary papers to the U.S. Marshals Service for service on Montigny. The court stated that service should occur within 90 days after the summons is issued, and that Flores should request an extension if service is not completed within that period.
The court also directed the New York Attorney General to identify Officer John Doe, including the officer’s identity, badge number, and service address, within 60 days. Within 30 days after receiving that information, Flores must file an amended complaint naming the officer. The court stated that the amended complaint will replace, rather than supplement, the original complaint and will be screened again.
Other Directions and Disposition
The court ruled that Local Civil Rule 33.2 applies. That rule requires defendants in certain prisoner cases to respond to specified discovery requests within 120 days after service of the complaint.
The court certified that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without prepaying fees for purposes of an appeal. The order therefore dismissed the claims against New York State and DOCCS, ordered service on Officer Montigny, and required identification of Officer John Doe; it did not resolve the merits of Flores’s assault allegations.
Read the full 6-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.