Samuel B. Foster Jr. v. New York Department of Correction

CourtDistrict Court, S.D. New York
DecidedDecember 3, 2025
Docket1:25-cv-05813
StatusUnknown

This text of Samuel B. Foster Jr. v. New York Department of Correction (Samuel B. Foster Jr. v. New York Department of Correction) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Samuel B. Foster Jr. v. New York Department of Correction, (S.D.N.Y. 2025).

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT ELECTRONICALLY FILED DOC #: _________________ SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK DATE FILED: 12/3/2025 ----------------------------------------------------------------- X : SAMUEL B. FOSTER JR.., : : Plaintiff, : 1:25-cv-5813-GHW : -v- : ORDER OF SERVICE : NEW YORK DEPARTMENT OF : CORRECTION, : : Defendant. : ----------------------------------------------------------------- X GREGORY H. WOODS, United States District Judge: Plaintiff, currently incarcerated at Mid-State Correctional Facility, brings this pro se action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that his constitutional rights were violated in 2023, when he was detained on Rikers Island. By order dated November 28, 2025, the Court granted Plaintiff’s request to proceed without prepayment of fees, that is, in forma pauperis (“IFP”).1 0F STANDARD OF REVIEW The Prison Litigation Reform Act requires that federal courts screen complaints brought by prisoners who seek relief against a governmental entity or an officer or employee of a governmental entity. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The Court must dismiss a prisoner’s in forma pauperis complaint, or any portion of the complaint, that is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim upon 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), 1915A(b); see Abbas v. Dixon, 480 F.3d 636, 639 (2d Cir. 2007). The Court must also dismiss a complaint if the court lacks subject matter jurisdiction. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3).

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). DISCUSSION I. Claims against DOC The Court must dismiss Plaintiff’s claims against DOC. As an agency of the City of New York, DOC is not an entity that can 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.”);

Edwards v. Arocho, 125 F.4th 336, 354 (2d Cir. 2024) (“A plaintiff cannot bring a claim against a municipal agency that does not have the capacity to be sued under its municipal charter.” (emphasis in original)); see also Johnson v. Dorby, 660 F. App’x 69, 72 (2d Cir. 2016) (summary order) (the NYCDOC is not a suable entity); Emerson v. City of New York, 740 F. Supp. 2d 385, 395 (S.D.N.Y. 2010) (“[A] plaintiff is generally prohibited from suing a municipal agency.”). The Court therefore dismisses Plaintiff’s claims against DOC for failure to state a claim on which relief may be granted. See § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). In light of the Plaintiff’s pro se status and clear intention to assert claims against the City of New York, the Court construes the complaint as asserting claims against the City of New York, and directs the Clerk of Court, pursuant to Rule 21 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, to amend the caption of this action to replace DOC with the City of New York. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 21. This amendment is without prejudice to any defenses that the City of New York may wish to assert. II. Service on the City of New York

The Clerk of Court is directed to notify DOC and the New York City Law Department of this order. The Court requests that the City of New York waive service of summons.2 1F

2 Should Plaintiff discover the names of individual Defendants who were personally involved in the underlying events, he may file an amended complaint, consistent with Rule 15(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, to add their names. 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, with a description, such as “John Doe #1, and an explanation of how that person was involved. Because Plaintiff’s amended complaint will completely CONCLUSION The Court dismisses Plaintiff’s claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the New York City Department of Correction for failure to state a claim on which relief may be granted. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)@). The Court directs the Clerk of Court to add the City of New York as a defendant. See Fed. R. Cty. P. 21. The Court also directs the Clerk of Court to electronically notify DOC and the New York City Law Department of this order. The Court requests that the City of New York waive service of summons. The Clerk of Court is also directed to mail an information package to Plaintiff. An amended complaint form is attached. SO ORDERED. Dated: December 3, 2025 New York, New York JN N Us eed GREGQRS H. WOODS United States District Judge

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. Additionally, the naming of John Doe defendants, 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.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW Y O R K

(In the space above enter the full name(s) of the plaintiff(s).) AMENDED COMPLAINT -against- under the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1983

Jury Trial: Q Yes Q No (check one)

____ Civ. _________ ( )

(In the space above enter the full name(s) of the defendant(s). 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 in the above caption must be identical to those contained in Part I. Addresses should not be included here.) I. Parties in this complaint: A. List your name, identification number, and the name and address of your current place of confinement. Do the same for any additional plaintiffs named. Attach additional sheets of paper as necessary. Plaintiff’s Name_____________________________________________________________ ID#_______________________________________________________________ Current Institution___________________________________________________ Address___________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ B. List all defendants’ names, positions, places of employment, and the address where each defendant may be served.

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

Related

Abbas v. Dixon
480 F.3d 636 (Second Circuit, 2007)
Emerson v. City of New York
740 F. Supp. 2d 385 (S.D. New York, 2010)
Johnson v. Dobry
660 F. App'x 69 (Second Circuit, 2016)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Samuel B. Foster Jr. v. New York Department of Correction, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/samuel-b-foster-jr-v-new-york-department-of-correction-nysd-2025.