Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled May 14, 2024

Griffith v. Harvey

Judge
Andrew Carter
Docket
1:24-cv-02714
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
4
Civil RightsSection 1983Pro SeCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Griffith v. Harvey, Judge Carter dismissed claims against GRVC during screening, added New York City as a defendant, and ordered service steps.

Who this affects

Brandon L. Griffith’s claims against GRVC were dismissed because GRVC is not a suable person under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The City of New York was added as a defendant, and the named officials and the City were involved in the ordered service and discovery procedures.

What happened

Brandon L. Griffith sued officials and facilities under a federal civil-rights law, claiming constitutional violations during his detention at two Rikers Island facilities. He was allowed to proceed without paying court fees upfront.

The court dismissed Griffith’s claims against GRVC because the facility is a building, not a person who can be sued under that law. Because Griffith was representing himself and appeared to intend claims against New York City, the court ordered the City to replace GRVC as a defendant. The court also requested that the City and the named officials waive formal service and ordered responses to standard prisoner-discovery requests within 120 days.

Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr. denied fee-free status for any appeal, certifying that an appeal would not be taken in good faith. The order otherwise directed the case’s service and discovery procedures to continue.

The detailed version

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

Case
Griffith v. Harvey · No. 1:24-cv-02714
Judge
Andrew Carter
Date
May 14, 2024

Background

Brandon L. Griffith brought this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal law that allows claims against a person acting under state law for violations of federal rights. He alleged that defendants violated his constitutional rights while he was detained at the Eric M. Taylor Center and George R. Vierno Center on Rikers Island. The court had previously granted his request to proceed without prepaying filing fees. The opinion states that prisoners must still pay the full filing fee over time.

Screening of the GRVC claims

Because Griffith was proceeding without a lawyer, the court was required to read his allegations liberally. It also had to dismiss claims that were frivolous, malicious, failed to state a legally sufficient claim, sought relief from an immune defendant, or fell outside the court’s jurisdiction.

The court dismissed Griffith’s claims against the George R. Vierno Center, or GRVC, for failure to state a claim. The court explained that GRVC is a building facility, not a person acting under state law, and therefore cannot be sued under § 1983. The opinion also states that the New York City Department of Correction, which operates GRVC, generally cannot be sued as a municipal agency.

Replacement of GRVC with New York City

Because of Griffith’s self-represented status and the court’s view that he likely intended to assert claims against New York City, the court ordered the Clerk of Court to replace GRVC with the City of New York as a defendant. The court stated that this amendment was without prejudice to any defenses the City might assert.

Service and discovery

The court directed the Clerk to notify the New York City Department of Correction and the New York City Law Department of the order. It requested that New York City, Warden Mrs. Harvey, Captain Payne, Correction Officer Dejesus, Correction Officer Tremarzo, and Warden Davis waive service of summons. The court also directed Griffith to notify the court if his address changes and warned that the action could be dismissed if he failed to do so.

Local Civil Rule 33.2 applies to the action. Under that rule, the defendants must respond within 120 days to specified prisoner-discovery requests and must quote each request verbatim in their responses.

Disposition

The court dismissed Griffith’s claims against GRVC for failure to state a claim, directed the Clerk to add the City of New York as a defendant, and ordered the service and discovery procedures described above. The court certified that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied Griffith permission to proceed without prepaying fees for an appeal.

The authoritative version

Read the full 4-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.