Bradley v. Otis Bantum Correctional Center et al

Filing 8

ORDER TO AMEND: Plaintiff is granted leave to file an amended complaint that complies with the standards set forth above. Plaintiff must submit the amended complaint to this Court's Pro Se Intake Unit within 60 days of the date of this order , caption the document as an "Amended Complaint," and label the document with docket number 24-CV-9668 (LTS). An Amended Civil Rights Complaint form is attached to this order. No summons will issue at this time. If Plaintiff fails to compl y within the time allowed, and he cannot show good cause to excuse such failure, the complaint will be dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. The Court dismisses Plaintiff's claims against Otis Bantum Correct ional Facility, Mayor Eric Adams, and Commissioner Lynelle Maginley-Liddie. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). The official capacity claims against Adams and Maginley-Liddie may be asserted against the City of New York, and the personal capacit y claims against these two defendants are dismissed for failure to state a claim because Plaintiff does not allege any facts in the complaint supporting an inference of their personal involvement. The Court certifies under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith, and therefore in forma pauperis status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. Cf. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962) (holding that an appellant demonstrates good faith when he seeks review of a nonfrivolous issue). SO ORDERED. Otis Bantum Correctional Center, Lynelle Maginley-Liddie and Mayor Eric Adams terminated. (Signed by Judge Laura Taylor Swain on 1/27/2025) (mml)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
JAMES BRADLEY,
Plaintiff,
-against-

24-CV-9668 (LTS)

OTIS BANTUM CORRECTIONAL
CENTER; THE CITY OF NEW YORK;
MAYOR ERIC ADAMS; COMMISSIONER
LYNELL MAGINLEY-LIDDIE,

ORDER TO AMEND

Defendants.
LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN, Chief United States District Judge:
Plaintiff James Bradley, who currently is detained at the Otis Bantum Correctional Center
(“OBCC”), brings this action, pro se, under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that Defendants violated
his constitutional rights during his detention at the OBCC. By order dated January 22, 2025, the
Court granted Plaintiff’s request to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”), that is, without
prepayment of fees. 1 For the reasons set forth below, the Court grants Plaintiff leave to file an
amended complaint within 60 days of the date of this order.
STANDARD OF REVIEW
The Court must dismiss an IFP complaint, or any portion of the complaint, that is
frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary
relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B); see
Livingston v. Adirondack Beverage Co., 141 F.3d 434, 437 (2d Cir. 1998). The Court must also

1

Prisoners are not exempt from paying the full filing fee even when they have been
granted permission to proceed IFP. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1).

dismiss a complaint when the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction of the claims raised. See
Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3).
While the law mandates dismissal on any of these grounds, the Court is obliged to
construe pro se pleadings liberally, Harris v. Mills, 572 F.3d 66, 72 (2d Cir. 2009), and interpret
them to raise the “strongest [claims] that they suggest,” Triestman v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons, 470
F.3d 471, 474 (2d Cir. 2006) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted) (emphasis in
original). But the “special solicitude” in pro se cases, id. at 475 (citation omitted), has its limits –
to state a claim, pro se pleadings still must comply with Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure, which requires a complaint to make a short and plain statement showing that the
pleader is entitled to relief.
Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires a complaint to include enough
facts to state a claim for relief “that is plausible on its face.” Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S.
544, 570 (2007). A claim is facially plausible if the plaintiff pleads enough factual detail to allow
the Court to draw the inference that the defendant is liable for the alleged misconduct. In
reviewing the complaint, the Court must accept all well-pleaded factual allegations as true.
Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678-79 (2009). But it does not have to accept as true
“[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action,” which are essentially just legal
conclusions. Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555. After separating legal conclusions from well-pleaded
factual allegations, the Court must determine whether those facts make it plausible – not merely
possible – that the pleader is entitled to relief. Id.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff initially filed this action with 62 other OBCC detainees. By order dated
December 12, 2024, the Court directed the Clerk of Court (1) to sever the claims brought by each

2

individual plaintiff whose name appeared in the complaint and (2) to open a new civil action for
each individual plaintiff.
The complaint contains several sets of allegations. Each set of allegations is handwritten
by a different individual. The facts do not describe Plaintiff’s individual experience at OBCC or
how any particular defendant violated his rights. Rather, the facts are written from the
perspective of all the individuals who signed the complaint. These facts concern several different
incidents occurring at OBCC involving the alleged denial of medical care, general complaints
about the conditions at OBCC, and specific allegations regarding alleged retaliation for
complaints lodged about these conditions. The complaint does not specify, however, that Plaintiff
suffered the denial of medical care or lodged complaints about his conditions.
Named as Defendants are the City of New York, the OBCC, Mayor Eric Adams, and
Commissioner Lynelle Maginley-Liddie. Individual correction officers are mentioned throughout
the complaint but are not named as defendants.
DISCUSSION
A.

Otis Bantum Correctional Center
Plaintiff’s claims against OBCC must be dismissed because it is not an entity that can be

sued under the New York City Charter. This defendant is a jail operated by the New York City
Department of Correction (“DOC”), and DOC is an agency of the City of New York that cannot
be sued. N.Y. City Charter ch. 17, § 396 (“[A]ll actions and proceedings for the recovery of
penalties for the violation of any law shall be brought in the name of the city of New York and
not in that of any agency, except where otherwise provided by law.”); Jenkins v. City of New
York, 478 F.3d 76, 93 n.19 (2d Cir. 2007); see also Emerson v. City of New York, 740 F. Supp. 2d
385, 396 (S.D.N.Y. 2010) (“[A] plaintiff is generally prohibited from suing a municipal

3

agency.”). The Court therefore dismisses OBCC as a defendant in this action for failure to state a
claim on which relief may be granted. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii).
Plaintiff names as a defendant the City of New York, and any claims he intended to bring
against OBCC may be asserted against the City of New York. 2
B.

Mayor Eric Adams and Commissioner Lynelle Maginley-Liddie
Official Capacity Claims
Plaintiff names as defendants Mayor Adams Commissioner Maginley-Liddie. To the

extent Plaintiff seeks to assert these claims against these defendants in their official capacity, the
Court construes these claims as claims against the City of New York, a named defendant in this
action. See Kentucky v. Graham, 473 U.S. 159, 166 (1985) (“As long as the government entity
receives notice and an opportunity to respond, an official-capacity suit is, in all respects other
than name, to be treated as a suit against the entity [of which the officer is an agent].”). The
Court dismisses the official capacity claims against these defendants. The claims against them
will proceed against the City of New York.
Personal Capacity Claims
To state a claim under Section 1983, a plaintiff must allege facts showing the defendants’
direct and personal involvement in the alleged constitutional deprivation. See Spavone v. N.Y.
State Dep’ t of Corr. Serv., 719 F.3d 127, 135 (2d Cir. 2013) (“It is well settled in this Circuit that
personal involvement of defendants in the alleged constitutional deprivations is a prerequisite to
an award of damages under § 1983.”) (internal quotation marks omitted). A defendant may not

2

To state a Section 1983 claim against a municipality, Plaintiff must allege facts showing
(1) the existence of a municipal policy, custom, or practice, and (2) that the policy, custom, or
practice caused the violation of the plaintiff’s constitutional rights. See Jones v. Town of East
Haven, 691 F.3d 72, 80 (2d Cir. 2012); Bd. of Cnty. Comm’rs v. Brown, 520 U.S. 397, 403 (1997)
(internal citations omitted).
4

be held liable under Section 1983 solely because that defendant employs or supervises a person
who violated the plaintiff’s rights. See Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 676 (2009) (“Government
officials may not be held liable for the unconstitutional conduct of their subordinates under a
theory of respondeat superior.”). Rather, “[t]o hold a state official liable under § 1983, a plaintiff
must plead and prove the elements of the underlying constitutional violation directly against the
official[.]” Tangreti v. Bachmann, 983 F.3d 609, 620 (2d Cir. 2020).
Plaintiff does not allege any facts showing how Defendants Mayor Eric Adams and
Commissioner Lynelle Maginley-Liddie were personally involved in the events underlying his
claims. Therefore, Plaintiff’s personal capacity claims against these two defendants are dismissed
for failure to state a claim because Plaintiff does not allege any facts in the complaint supporting
an inference of their personal involvement. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii).
C.

Plaintiff’s Claims
As noted above, because the operative pleading is written from the perspective of several

individuals, it does not include any facts specific to Plaintiff. In other words, the complaint does
not provide factual allegations regarding Plaintiff’s experiences and how any particular
correction officer violated his rights. Accordingly, Plaintiff must allege his own set of facts
detailing his claims and naming the individual officers who violated his rights.
Moreover, while correction officers are mentioned throughout the complaint, they are not
named as defendants. If Plaintiff seeks to bring claims against these individuals, he must name
them in the caption of the complaint and state facts suggesting that they violated his personal
rights.
LEAVE TO AMEND
Plaintiff proceeds in this matter without the benefit of an attorney. District courts
generally should grant a self-represented plaintiff an opportunity to amend a complaint to cure its
5

defects, unless amendment would be futile. See Hill v. Curcione, 657 F.3d 116, 123-24 (2d Cir.
2011); Salahuddin v. Cuomo, 861 F.2d 40, 42 (2d Cir. 1988). Indeed, the Second Circuit has
cautioned that district courts “should not dismiss [a pro se complaint] without granting leave to
amend at least once when a liberal reading of the complaint gives any indication that a valid
claim might be stated.” Cuoco v. Moritsugu, 222 F.3d 99, 112 (2d Cir. 2000) (quoting Gomez v.
USAA Fed. Sav. Bank, 171 F.3d 794, 795 (2d Cir. 1999)). Because Plaintiff may be able to allege
additional facts to state valid claims, the Court grants Plaintiff 60 days’ leave to amend his
complaint to detail his claims as follows.
First, Plaintiff must name as the defendant(s) in the caption 3 and in the statement of claim
those individuals who were allegedly involved in the deprivation of his federal rights. If Plaintiff
does not know the name of a defendant, he may refer to that individual as “John Doe” or “Jane
Doe” in both the caption and the body of the amended complaint. 4 The naming of John Doe
defendants, however, does not toll the three-year statute of limitations period governing this
action and Plaintiff shall be responsible for ascertaining the true identity of any “John Doe”
defendants and amending his complaint to include the identity of any “John Doe” defendants
before the statute of limitations period expires. Should Plaintiff seek to add a new claim or party
after the statute of limitations period has expired, he must meet the requirements of Rule 15(c) of
the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

3

The caption is located on the front page of the complaint. Each individual defendant
must be named in the caption. Plaintiff may attach additional pages if there is not enough space
to list all of the defendants in the caption. If Plaintiff needs to attach an additional page to list all
defendants, he should write “see attached list” on the first page of the Amended Complaint. Any
defendants named in the caption must also be discussed in Plaintiff’s statement of claim.
4

For example, a defendant may be identified as: “Correction Officer John Doe #1 on
duty August 4, 2024, at OBCC, during the 7-3 p.m. shift.”
6

Second, in the “Statement of Claim” section of the amended complaint form, Plaintiff
must provide a short and plain statement of the relevant facts supporting each claim against each
defendant. If Plaintiff has an address for any named defendant, Plaintiff must provide it. Plaintiff
should include all of the information in the amended complaint that Plaintiff wants the Court to
consider in deciding whether the amended complaint states a claim for relief. That information
should include:
a) the names and titles of all relevant people;
b) a description of all relevant events, including what each defendant did or failed to do,
the approximate date and time of each event, and the general location where each
event occurred;
c) a description of the injuries Plaintiff suffered; and
d) the relief Plaintiff seeks, such as money damages, injunctive relief, or declaratory
relief.
Essentially, Plaintiff’s amended complaint should tell the Court: who violated his
federally protected rights and how; when and where such violations occurred; and why Plaintiff
is entitled to relief.
Because Plaintiff’s amended complaint will completely replace, not supplement, the
original complaint, any facts or claims that Plaintiff wants to include from the original complaint
must be repeated in the amended complaint.
CONCLUSION
Plaintiff is granted leave to file an amended complaint that complies with the standards
set forth above. Plaintiff must submit the amended complaint to this Court’s Pro Se Intake Unit
within 60 days of the date of this order, caption the document as an “Amended Complaint,” and
label the document with docket number 24-CV-9668 (LTS). An Amended Civil Rights
Complaint form is attached to this order. No summons will issue at this time. If Plaintiff fails to

7

comply within the time allowed, and he cannot show good cause to excuse such failure, the
complaint will be dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.
The Court dismisses Plaintiff’s claims against Otis Bantum Correctional Facility, Mayor
Eric Adams, and Commissioner Lynelle Maginley-Liddie. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). The
official capacity claims against Adams and Maginley-Liddie may be asserted against the City of
New York, and the personal capacity claims against these two defendants are dismissed for
failure to state a claim because Plaintiff does not allege any facts in the complaint supporting an
inference of their personal involvement.
The Court certifies under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this order would
not be taken in good faith, and therefore in forma pauperis status is denied for the purpose of an
appeal. Cf. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962) (holding that an appellant
demonstrates good faith when he seeks review of a nonfrivolous issue).
SO ORDERED.
Dated:

January 27, 2025
New York, New York
/s/ Laura Taylor Swain
LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN
Chief United States District Judge

8

U NITED S TATES D ISTRICT C OURT
S OUTHERN D ISTRICT OF N EW Y ORK

_____CV_______________
(Include case number if one has been
assigned)

Write the full name of each plaintiff.

AMENDED
-against-

COMPLAINT
(Prisoner)
Do you want a jury trial?
? ??Yes
? ??No

Write the full name of each defendant. If you cannot fit the
names of all of the defendants in the space provided, please
write “see attached” in the space above and attach an
additional sheet of paper with the full list of names. The
names listed above must be identical to those contained in
Section IV.

NOTICE
The public can access electronic court files. For privacy and security reasons, papers filed
with the court should therefore not contain: an individual’s full social security number or full
birth date; the full name of a person known to be a minor; or a complete financial account
number. A filing may include only: the last four digits of a social security number; the year of
an individual’s birth; a minor’s initials; and the last four digits of a financial account number.
See Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2.

Rev. 5/20/16

I.

LEGAL BASIS FOR CLAIM

State below the federal legal basis for your claim, if known. This form is designed primarily for
prisoners challenging the constitutionality of their conditions of confinement; those claims are
often brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (against state, county, or municipal defendants) or in a
“Bivens” action (against federal defendants).

? ??Violation of my federal constitutional rights
? ??Other:
II.

PLAINTIFF INFORMATION

Each plaintiff must provide the following information. Attach additional pages if necessary.

First Name

Middle Initial

Last Name

State any other names (or different forms of your name) you have ever used, including any name
you have used in previously filing a lawsuit.

Prisoner ID # (if you have previously been in another agency’s custody, please specify each agency
and the ID number (such as your DIN or NYSID) under which you were held)

Current Place of Detention

Institutional Address

County, City

III.

State

Zip Code

PRISONER STATUS

Indicate below whether you are a prisoner or other confined person:

? ??Pretrial detainee
? ??Civilly committed detainee
? ??Immigration detainee
? ??Convicted and sentenced prisoner
? ??Other:

Page 2

IV.

DEFENDANT INFORMATION

To the best of your ability, provide the following information for each defendant. If the correct
information is not provided, it could delay or prevent service of the complaint on the defendant.
Make sure that the defendants listed below are identical to those listed in the caption. Attach
additional pages as necessary.
Defendant 1:

First Name

Last Name

Shield #

Current Job Title (or other identifying information)
Current Work Address
County, City

State

Zip Code

Defendant 2:

First Name

Last Name

Shield #

Current Job Title (or other identifying information)
Current Work Address
County, City

State

Zip Code

Defendant 3:

First Name

Last Name

Shield #

Current Job Title (or other identifying information)
Current Work Address
County, City

State

Zip Code

Defendant 4:

First Name

Last Name

Shield #

Current Job Title (or other identifying information)
Current Work Address
County, City

State

Zip Code

Page 3

V.

STATEMENT OF CLAIM

Place(s) of occurrence:

Date(s) of occurrence:
FACTS:

State here briefly the FACTS that support your case. Describe what happened, how you were
harmed, and how each defendant was personally involved in the alleged wrongful actions. Attach
additional pages as necessary.

Page 4

INJURIES:

If you were injured as a result of these actions, describe your injuries and what medical treatment,
if any, you required and received.

VI.

RELIEF

State briefly what money damages or other relief you want the court to order.

Page 5

VII.

PLAINTIFF’S CERTIFICATION AND WARNINGS

By signing below, I certify to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief that: (1) the
complaint is not being presented for an improper purpose (such as to harass, cause unnecessary
delay, or needlessly increase the cost of litigation); (2) the claims are supported by existing law
or by a nonfrivolous argument to change existing law; (3) the factual contentions have
evidentiary support or, if specifically so identified, will likely have evidentiary support after a
reasonable opportunity for further investigation or discovery; and (4) the complaint otherwise
complies with the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11.
I understand that if I file three or more cases while I am a prisoner that are dismissed as
frivolous, malicious, or for failure to state a claim, I may be denied in forma pauperis status in
future cases.
I also understand that prisoners must exhaust administrative procedures before filing an action
in federal court about prison conditions, 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a), and that my case may be
dismissed if I have not exhausted administrative remedies as required.
I agree to provide the Clerk's Office with any changes to my address. I understand that my
failure to keep a current address on file with the Clerk's Office may result in the dismissal of my
case.

Each Plaintiff must sign and date the complaint. Attach additional pages if necessary. If seeking to
proceed without prepayment of fees, each plaintiff must also submit an IFP application.

Dated
First Name

Plaintiff’s Signature
Middle Initial

Last Name

Prison Address
County, City

State

Zip Code

Date on which I am delivering this complaint to prison authorities for mailing:

Page 6