Jackson v. Beacon City School District

District Court, S.D. New York·Decided January 14, 2020·No. 7:19-cv-08164-PMH·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK WALTER L. JACKSON, Plaintiff, 19-CV-8164 (NSR) -against- ORDER BEACON CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT, Defendants. NELSON S. ROMAN, United States District Judge:

Plaintiff Walter L. Jackson, appearing pro se and proceeding in forma pauperis (IFP), filed this action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VIP’), 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17, alleging that his employer discriminated against him based on his race. Because Plaintiff did not allege facts suggesting that Defendant took any adverse action against him based on his membership in a protected class, and because his allegations seemed to suggest that there was a reason other than his membership in a protected class that resulted in Defendant not paying him, the Court, by order dated November 14, 2019, granted Plaintiff 60 days’ leave to file

an amended complaint. Plaintiff filed an amended complaint on November 27, 2019. (ECF No. 6.) Plaintiff's amended complaint fails to cure the deficiencies of his original complaint. Plaintiff, in his amended complaint, realleges the same facts. Although he writes “see attached” at the end of his statement of facts, he does not attach any documents to his amended complaint. Plaintiffs amended complaint is therefore insufficient to state an employment discrimination claim.

hiyltoze

LEAVE TO AMEND Second Circuit precedent is clear that “[a] pro se complaint should not [be] dismiss[ed] without [the Court’s] granting leave to amend at least once when a liberal reading of the complaint gives any indication that a valid claim might be stated.” Dolan v. Connolly, 794 F.3d 290, 295 (2d Cir. 2015) (quoting Chavis v. Chappius, 618 F.3d 162, 170 (2d Cir. 2010) (internal quotation marks omitted)). Although the Court has already given Plaintiff one opportunity to amend his complaint, in an abundance of caution, the Court grants Plaintiff one final opportunity to amend his complaint to allege enough facts to establish an employment discrimination claim. If Plaintiff is unable to meet this burden in a second amended complaint, the Court will have to dismiss this action for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. If Plaintiff chooses to file a second amended complaint, the Court strongly encourages him to ask for assistance from someone who can help him organize his thoughts and claims. If Plaintiff needs legal advice related to this matter, he may contact the New York Legal Assistance Group’s Legal Clinic for Pro Se Litigants in the Southern District of New York, which is a free legal clinic staffed by attorneys and paralegals to assist those who are representing themselves in civil lawsuits in this Court. A copy of the flyer with details of the clinic is attached to this order. The second amended complaint, if Plaintiff chooses to file one, should be sent to this Court’s Pro Se Intake Unit and labeled with docket number 19-CV-8164 (NSR). In the statement of claim, Plaintiff must provide a short and plain statement of the relevant facts supporting each claim against each defendant named in the second amended complaint. Plaintiff is also directed to provide the addresses for any named defendants. To the

greatest extent possible, Plaintiff's second amended complaint must: a) give the names and titles of all relevant persons;

b) describe all relevant events, stating the facts that support Plaintiffs case including what each defendant did or failed to do; c) give the dates and times of each relevant event or, if not known, the approximate date and time of each relevant event; d) give the location where each relevant event occurred; e) describe how each defendant’s acts or omissions violated Plaintiff's rights and describe the injuries Plaintiff suffered; and f) state what relief Plaintiff seeks from the Court, such as money damages, injunctive relief, or declaratory relief. Essentially, the body of Plaintiffs second amended complaint must tell the Court: who violated his federally protected rights; what facts show that his federally protected rights were violated; when such violation occurred; where such violation occurred; and why Plaintiff is entitled to relief, Because Plaintiffs second amended complaint will completely replace, not supplement, the original complaint and the amended complaint, any facts or claims that Plaintiff wishes to maintain must be included in the second amended complaint. CONCLUSION The Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of this order to Plaintiff and note service on the docket. Plaintiff is granted leave to file a second amended complaint that complies with the standards set forth in the Court’s November 14, 2019 order. Plaintiff must submit the second amended complaint to this Court’s Pro Se Intake Unit within 45 days of the date of this order, caption the document as a “Second Amended Complaint,” and label the document with docket number 19-CV-8164 (NSR). A Second Amended Employment Discrimination Complaint form is attached to this order. No summons will issue at this time. If Plaintiff fails to comply within the time allowed and cannot show good cause to excuse such failure, the Court will dismiss this action for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.

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 IFP 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 14, 2020 White Plains, New York ef ee “NELSON S. ROMAN United States District Judge

| eag since 1990, NYLAG has provided free civil legal services Don’ Seems) to New Yorkers who cannot afford private attorneys. NEW YORK LEGAL ASSISTANCE GROUP Free Legal Assistance for Self-Represented Civil Litigants in Federal District Court in Manhattan and White Plains

The NYLAG Legal Clinic for Pro Se Litigants in the Southern District of New York is a free legal clinic staffed by oe attorneys and paralegals to assist those who Thurgood Marshall are representing themselves or planning to United States Courthouse represent themselves in civil lawsuits in the Room LL22 oe □□ Southern District of New York. The clinic, 40 Centre Street □□□□ which is not part of or run by the court, New York, NY 10007 □□ assists litigants with federal civil cases (212) 659 6190 including cases involving civil rights, employment discrimination, labor law, Open weekdays social security benefits, foreclosure and tax. IO am.- 4 p.m. The clinic cannot assist individuals while Closed on federal and court holidays they are incarcerated, but can provide oe □□ assistance to litigants once they are . released from custody. ge

To make an appointment for a The Hon. Charles L. Brieant Jr. consultation, call (212) 659-6190 or come Federal Building and Courthouse by either clinic during office hours. Please 300 Quarropas St □□ note that a government-issued photo ID is White Plains, NY 10601 required to enter either building. (212) 6596190 The clinic offers in-person Open Wednesday oe appointments only. The clinic does ae 12 p.m.- 4 p.m. not offer assistance over the phone Closed on federal and court holidays or by email. □

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Jackson v. Beacon City School District, (S.D.N.Y. 2020).

Jackson v. Beacon City School District (Jackson v. Beacon City School District) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Coppedge v. United States
369 U.S. 438 (Supreme Court, 1962)
Chavis v. Chappius
618 F.3d 162 (Second Circuit, 2010)
Dolan v. Connolly
794 F.3d 290 (Second Circuit, 2015)