Anthony v. New York
| Decision Date | 27 February 2019 |
| Docket Number | 9:18-CV-0849 (GLS/CFH) |
| Parties | TERRENCE ANTHONY, Plaintiff, v. THE STATE OF NEW YORK et al., Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Northern District of New York |
APPEARANCES:
TERRENCE ANTHONY
Plaintiff, Pro Se
Great Meadow Correctional Facility
Box 51
Comstock, NY 12821
Plaintiff Terrence Anthony commenced this action by filing a pro se civil rights complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 ("Section 1983"), together with a motion for a preliminary injunction and an application to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP). See Dkt. No. 1 ("Compl."); Dkt. No. 3 ("Preliminary Injunction Motion"); Dkt. No. 11 ("IFP Application").1 ByDecision and Order of this Court filed January 4, 2019, plaintiff's IFP Application was granted, but, following review of the complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) and 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b), the Court found that the complaint was subject to dismissal for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Dkt. No. 15 (the "January 2019 Order").2 In light of his pro se status, plaintiff was afforded an opportunity to submit an amended complaint. Id. Presently before this Court is plaintiff's amended complaint. Dkt. No. 16 ("Am. Compl.").3
In his original complaint, plaintiff asserted claims based on events that allegedly occurred in and around March 2017, while he was incarcerated at Albany County Correctional Facility (ACCF). See generally Compl. Plaintiff alleged that he was sexually assaulted by "prison staff" while housed in a special housing unit at ACCF, and that "prison authorities" thereafter failed to adequately investigate his complaints. Compl. at 1-2, 5-8. Plaintiff named as defendants Superintendent of ACCF Michelle Lions, ACCF Chief of Corrections B. Moonie, and the State of New York. Id. at 1-2.
The complaint was construed to assert Eighth Amendment excessive force and failure-to-protect claims, as well as state law claims, arising out of the alleged assaultand subsequent failure to investigate. See January 2019 Order at 5.
Following review of the complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) and 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b), plaintiff's claims against the State of New York were dismissed with prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) and 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) as barred by the Eleventh Amendment, and his remaining claims were dismissed without prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) and 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. See January 2019 Order at 6-10.
Because plaintiff is proceeding IFP and is an inmate suing government employees, his amended complaint must be reviewed in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) and 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). The legal standard governing the dismissal of a pleading for failure to state a claim pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) and 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) was discussed at length in the January 2019 Order and it will not be restated in this Decision and Order. See January 2019 Order at 2-4.
Plaintiff's amended complaint contains additional allegations regarding the alleged assault, and alleged wrongdoing both before and after the assault. See generally Am. Compl.4 In addition to re-naming Superintendent of ACCF Michelle Lions and ACCF Chief of Corrections B. Moonie as defendants, plaintiff names the following other individuals as defendants: (1) Corrections Sergeant O'Tolle; (2) Corrections Officer Miller; and (3)Corrections Officer Larry. Id. at 1-2, 5-6.5 The following facts are set forth as alleged by plaintiff in his amended complaint.
On November 3, 2016, Corrections Sergeant Merlin Thomas from ACCF was arrested and indicted for "introducing contraband into Albany County Correctional Facility[.]" Am. Compl. at 3. Plaintiff was named as his co-defendant. Id.
On February 27, 2016, plaintiff was assigned to the special housing unit at ACCF. Am. Compl. at 3. On November 7, 2016, plaintiff wrote a letter to defendant Moonie in which plaintiff indicated that he was in "fear for his personal health and safety" because corrections officers "were spitting in plaintiff[']s food[.]" Id.; see Dkt. No. 16-1 at 3. Plaintiff further stated that corrections officials were only feeding him twice a day, were referring to him as a derogatory slur, and were leaving the lights in his cell on "all night." Dkt. No. 16-1 at 3. Plaintiff identified one of the individuals involved in the misconduct as defendant Larry and stated that he was unsure of the names of the other officials, one of whom he later learned was defendant Miller. Id.; Am. Compl. at 3. Prior to sending this letter, plaintiff submitted a grievance to defendants Moonie and Lions regarding his concerns about "what is takeing [sic] place in S.H.U." Dkt. No. 16-1 at 3.
On November 18, 2016, plaintiff wrote a letter to defendant Lions in which he indicated that he was in "fear for his personal health and safety[.]" Am. Compl. at 3. Plaintiff further indicated that corrections officials "were spitting in [his] food and leaving the lights on all night[.]" Id.; Dkt. No. 16-1 at 4. Plaintiff requested that defendant Lions intervene to stopthe mistreatment, and stated his concern that the corrections officials will "do something to [him]" if he asks them to stop. Dkt. No. 16-1 at 4. Plaintiff also noted in his letter that defendants Moonie and Lions had ignored his oral requests to speak with them, which he made when they had passed his cell on one or more unidentified occasions. Id.
On December 19, 2016, plaintiff submitted a grievance to defendants Lions and Moonie in which he expressed his fear of "bodily harm from the officers and staff in . . . [the] special housing unit" stemming from his involvement in "receiving contraband from [Corrections Sergeant] Thomas[.]" Dkt. No. 16-1 at 6. Plaintiff stated that the lights had been left on in his cell for thirty consecutive days "all day and night" and that an unidentified corrections sergeant and corrections officer threatened him and "threw piss in another inmate[']s face" on the date of his grievance. Id.
On March 10, 2017, during the 3 P.M. to 11 P.M. shift, defendant O'Tolle entered plaintiff's cell and advised plaintiff that he was "going to do [plaintiff's] disciplinary hearing and that he knew that two Albany County Sheriffs interigated [sic] the plaintiff about his co-worker (Merlin Thomas) and that [plaintiff] ratted him out[.]" Am. Compl. at 4. Plaintiff advised defendant O'Tolle that it was improper for him to conduct a disciplinary hearing at that time for a "ticket" plaintiff had received during the 7 A.M. to 3 P.M. shift. Id. In response, defendant O'Tolle "grabbed the plaintiff by the throat and forced him up against the wall," then "used his other hand to grabb [sic] . . . [plaintiff's] testicals [sic]." Id.
Following the assault, plaintiff reported the incident to an unidentified corrections lieutenant, who took plaintiff's statement and offered him medical assistance, which plaintiff refused because defendant O'Tolle "was the person that was going to escort [him] to medical." Am. Compl. at 4. The next day, defendant Moonie spoke to plaintiff and stated,"You got what you wanted." Id.
On or about March 12, 2017, plaintiff submitted two grievances to defendants Moonie and Lions. See Dkt. No. 16-1 at 2, 5. In one of the grievances, plaintiff indicated that defendants Miller and Larry refused to feed him, and that defendant Larry stated that "people that rat on C.O.s don't get to eat." Dkt. No. 16-1 at 2. Plaintiff further indicated in that grievance that defendant O'Tolle threatened to beat plaintiff the next time plaintiff "come[s] to the Box[.]" Id. Plaintiff expressed concern for his safety within the facility because "all of [the] officers are retallating [sic] against [him] for thinking [he] ratted out Sgt Thomas." Id.
In the other grievance, plaintiff indicated that defendants Larry and O'Tolle threatened to "beat [his] ass once [his] cell gets opened." Dkt. No. 16-1 at 5. Plaintiff requested to be placed in "a camera cell" until his sentencing on April 27, 2017. Id.
On April 19, 2017, plaintiff submitted a grievance indicating that he was "sexually assaulted" by defendant O'Tolle. Am. Compl. at 4; Dkt. No. 16-1 at 1.
Liberally construed, the amended complaint asserts the following claims against the named defendants in their individual and official capacities: (1) First Amendment retaliation claims against defendants O'Tolle, Miller, Larry, Lions, and Moonie; (2) Eighth Amendment conditions-of-confinement claims against defendants Miller, Larry, Lions, and Moonie; (3) an Eighth Amendment excessive force claim against defendant O'Tolle; (4) Eighth Amendment failure-to-protect claims against defendants Miller, Larry, Lions, and Moonie; and (5) harassment claims against defendants O'Tolle, Miller, and Larry.
Plaintiff seeks monetary relief. Am. Compl. at 5-6. For a more complete statement of plaintiff's claims, reference is made to the amended complaint.
The Eleventh Amendment has long been construed as barring a citizen from bringing a suit against his or her own state in federal court, under the fundamental principle of "sovereign immunity." U.S. Const. amend. XI (); Hans v. Louisiana, 134 U.S. 1, 10-21 (1890); Idaho v. Coeur d'Alene Tribe of Idaho, 521 U.S. 261, 267 (1997); Pennhurst State Sch. & Hosp. v. Halderman, 465 U.S. 89, 100 (1984). Eleventh Amendment immunity is lost only if Congress unequivocally abrogates states' immunity or a state expressly consents to suit. Gollomp v. Spitzer, 568 F.3d 355,...
To continue reading
Request your trial