Moments v. Warden Ada Pressley
- Gregory Woods
- 1:24-cv-01865
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Moments v. Pressley, Judge Woods added Ada Pressley and New York City as defendants and ordered service steps.
Betta Moments’s lawsuit proceeds with Warden Ada Pressley and the City of New York identified as defendants; the order does not determine the merits of the claims or the defendants’ possible defenses.
What happened
In Moments v. Warden Ada Pressley, Betta Moments, who is incarcerated and representing herself, sued under a federal civil-rights law over alleged constitutional violations at Rikers Island. This order did not decide whether those allegations were true or whether they stated a valid claim.
Because Moments named the facility’s warden as “John Doe” but clearly intended to sue Warden Ada Pressley and the City of New York, the court directed the clerk to replace the placeholder name and add the City as a defendant.
Judge Woods also directed the clerk to notify the relevant city agencies, requested that the defendants waive formal service of the lawsuit, and ordered that a copy of the order and an information package be mailed to Moments. The amendment did not prevent the defendants from raising defenses.
The detailed version
- Moments v. Warden Ada Pressley · No. 1:24-cv-01865
- Gregory Woods
- May 24, 2024
Background
Betta Moments, who is incarcerated at the Rose M. Singer Center on Rikers Island and is proceeding without a lawyer, filed an action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal law that allows claims against state or local officials for constitutional violations. She alleged that, while she was incarcerated at the Robert N. Davoren Center on Rikers Island, the defendant violated her constitutional rights. The court had previously allowed her to proceed without paying filing fees in advance.
The complaint named the warden of the Robert N. Davoren Center as “Warden (John Doe).” Moments alleged that the warden created or allowed a policy or custom under which unconstitutional practices occurred. The opinion states that New York City Department of Correction records identified Ada Pressley as the facility’s warden.
Court’s action
The court applied Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 21, which allows parties to be added or removed from a case. Considering Moments’s self-represented status and her clear intent to assert claims against Warden Ada Pressley and the City of New York, the court directed the clerk to amend the case caption by replacing Warden John Doe with Warden Ada Pressley and adding the City of New York as a defendant.
The court stated that this amendment was without prejudice to any defenses that Warden Ada Pressley and the City of New York might raise. In other words, the amendment added the parties but did not resolve whether Moments’s claims were legally sufficient or whether the defendants had other defenses.
Service and disposition
The clerk was directed to notify the New York City Department of Correction and the New York City Law Department about the order. The court requested that Warden Ada Pressley and the City of New York waive service of summons, and it directed the clerk to mail Moments a copy of the order and an information package. The order was signed by Judge Gregory H. Woods. The opinion is an order concerning the parties and service; it does not decide the merits of Moments’s constitutional claims.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.