UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ALPHONSO SYVILLE, Plaintiff, 22-CV-8009 (LTS) -against- ORDER TO AMEND CITY OF NEW YORK, et al., Defendants. LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN, Chief United States District Judge: Plaintiff, who is appearing pro se, brings this action invoking the Court’s federal question jurisdiction and alleging that Defendants violated his federally protected rights. By order dated October 7, 2022, the Court granted Plaintiff’s request to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”), that is, without prepayment of fees. 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 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 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 brings this action against (1) the City of New York, (2) Paul Hargrow, an
employee of the New York City Department of Homeless Services (“DHS”), and (3) Smila Kodali, an employee of the New York City Health + Hospitals Corporation at “Elmhurst Medical Department” in Upper Manhattan.1 (ECF 2, at 3.) Plaintiff asserts that Defendants have
1 The Court notes that, in 2020, Plaintiff filed an action in this court in which he sued the three defendants named in this new complaint. See Syville v. City of New York, No. 20-CV-4633 (PGG) (JLC) (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 31, 2022) (Syville I). In that action, Plaintiff alleged discrimination and retaliation in the provision of shelter services. On October 28, 2022, Judge Paul G. Gardephe adopted Magistrate Judge James L. Cott’s Report and Recommendation (id., ECF 57), which recommended that the defendants’ motion to dismiss be converted to one for summary judgement and that the defendants’ summary judgment motion be granted (id., ECF 66). Judge Cott had found that on June 17, 2020 ‒ the day before Plaintiff filed Syville I ‒ Plaintiff had executed a General Release with the City in another case that barred him from bringing civil rights claims that arose before June 17, 2020, against the City or its employees. Id. at 13. Judge discriminated, harassed, and retaliated against him in violation of multiple federal statutes, including 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), the “Human Rights Act,” the Fair Housing Act, and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (“HIPAA”). (Id.) Plaintiff states that his claims arise from events occurring inside DHS’s shelters
and hotels during the COVID-19 pandemic, from March 2020, to May 2021. For the facts underlying his claims, Plaintiff writes “See complaint and paperwork,” but he does not attach to the complaint any documents with factual allegations. (Id. at 4.) As his injuries, Plaintiff lists “mental anguish, anxiety, depression, traumatized, scared, fighting for [his] life, [and] stress.” (Id. at 5.) He seeks $5 million in damages. DISCUSSION The complaint does not comply with Rule 8’s requirement that it provide a short and plain statement showing that Plaintiff is entitled to relief. Plaintiff’s complaint, which appears to be incomplete, does not allege any facts from which the Court can discern the claims he is seeking to bring against Defendants. The Court therefore grants Plaintiff 60 days’ leave to file an amended complaint.
Plaintiff is granted leave to amend his complaint to provide facts about his claims against Defendants. 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
Cott determined that Plaintiff’s claims in Syville I were premised on conduct that occurred prior to June 17, 2020, and were therefore covered by the General Release. Judge Gardephe agreed with Judge Cott, finding that the General Release was enforceable in Syville I, and granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment on that basis. (Id. at 17.) 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. Plaintiff’s amended complaint will completely replace, not supplement, the original complaint.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ALPHONSO SYVILLE, Plaintiff, 22-CV-8009 (LTS) -against- ORDER TO AMEND CITY OF NEW YORK, et al., Defendants. LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN, Chief United States District Judge: Plaintiff, who is appearing pro se, brings this action invoking the Court’s federal question jurisdiction and alleging that Defendants violated his federally protected rights. By order dated October 7, 2022, the Court granted Plaintiff’s request to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”), that is, without prepayment of fees. 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 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 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 brings this action against (1) the City of New York, (2) Paul Hargrow, an
employee of the New York City Department of Homeless Services (“DHS”), and (3) Smila Kodali, an employee of the New York City Health + Hospitals Corporation at “Elmhurst Medical Department” in Upper Manhattan.1 (ECF 2, at 3.) Plaintiff asserts that Defendants have
1 The Court notes that, in 2020, Plaintiff filed an action in this court in which he sued the three defendants named in this new complaint. See Syville v. City of New York, No. 20-CV-4633 (PGG) (JLC) (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 31, 2022) (Syville I). In that action, Plaintiff alleged discrimination and retaliation in the provision of shelter services. On October 28, 2022, Judge Paul G. Gardephe adopted Magistrate Judge James L. Cott’s Report and Recommendation (id., ECF 57), which recommended that the defendants’ motion to dismiss be converted to one for summary judgement and that the defendants’ summary judgment motion be granted (id., ECF 66). Judge Cott had found that on June 17, 2020 ‒ the day before Plaintiff filed Syville I ‒ Plaintiff had executed a General Release with the City in another case that barred him from bringing civil rights claims that arose before June 17, 2020, against the City or its employees. Id. at 13. Judge discriminated, harassed, and retaliated against him in violation of multiple federal statutes, including 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), the “Human Rights Act,” the Fair Housing Act, and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (“HIPAA”). (Id.) Plaintiff states that his claims arise from events occurring inside DHS’s shelters
and hotels during the COVID-19 pandemic, from March 2020, to May 2021. For the facts underlying his claims, Plaintiff writes “See complaint and paperwork,” but he does not attach to the complaint any documents with factual allegations. (Id. at 4.) As his injuries, Plaintiff lists “mental anguish, anxiety, depression, traumatized, scared, fighting for [his] life, [and] stress.” (Id. at 5.) He seeks $5 million in damages. DISCUSSION The complaint does not comply with Rule 8’s requirement that it provide a short and plain statement showing that Plaintiff is entitled to relief. Plaintiff’s complaint, which appears to be incomplete, does not allege any facts from which the Court can discern the claims he is seeking to bring against Defendants. The Court therefore grants Plaintiff 60 days’ leave to file an amended complaint.
Plaintiff is granted leave to amend his complaint to provide facts about his claims against Defendants. 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
Cott determined that Plaintiff’s claims in Syville I were premised on conduct that occurred prior to June 17, 2020, and were therefore covered by the General Release. Judge Gardephe agreed with Judge Cott, finding that the General Release was enforceable in Syville I, and granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment on that basis. (Id. at 17.) 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. Plaintiff’s amended complaint will completely replace, not supplement, the original complaint. Plaintiff may consider contacting the New York Legal Assistance Group’s (“NYLAG”) 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. The clinic is run by a private organization; it is not part of, or run by, the court. It cannot accept filings on behalf of the court, which must still be made by any pro se party through the Pro Se Intake Unit. A copy of the flyer with details of the clinic is attached to this order. 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 22-CV-8009 (LTS). An Amended Complaint form is attached to this order. No summons will issue at this time. If Plaintiff fails to 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 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: May 1, 2023 New York, New York
/s/ Laura Taylor Swain LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN Chief United States District Judge SD lee Pe ew Since 1990, NYLAG has provided free civil legal services New York ME Legal Assistance Group to New Yorkers who cannot afford private attorneys.
Free Legal Assistance for Self-Represented Civil Litigants in District Court for the Southern District Of New Yor|
NYLAG Legal Clinic for Pro Se Litigants in the Southern District of New York is a fre clinic staffed by attorneys, law students and paralegals to assist those who are themselves or planning to represent themselves in civil lawsuits in the outhern District of New York. The clinic does not provide full representation. The clinic, is not part of or run by the court, assists litigants with federal civil cases including involving civil rights, employment discrimination, labor law, social security benefit: and tax.
Contact the Clinic: (212) 659-6190 or complete our online intake form (found here: A staff member will contact you within a few days.
looking for assistance can also contact the clinic at the kiosk located across the hall the pro se clinic office in the courthouse.
this time, the clinic offers remote consultations only. Requests for in- appointments will be reviewed on a case-to-case basis. and Hours: Marshall United States Courthouse
Room LL22 40 Foley Square New York, NY 10007 (212) 659 6190 Open weekdays 10 a.m. — 4 p.m. Closed on federal and court holidays
ii □□□□ □
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
CV TT (clu ber if has b Write the full name of each plaintiff. ened) nummer troneines seen
-against- AMENDED
COMPLAINT □□ Do you want a jury trial? [(1Yes (CINo
Write the full name of each defendant. If you need more space, 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 Il.
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. 2/10/17
I. BASIS FOR JURISDICTION Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction (limited power). Generally, only two types of cases can be heard in federal court: cases involving a federal question and cases involving diversity of citizenship of the parties. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1331, a case arising under the United States Constitution or federal laws or treaties is a federal question case. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1332, a case in which a citizen of one State sues a citizen of another State or nation, and the amount in controversy is more than $75,000, is a diversity case. In a diversity case, no defendant may be a citizen of the same State as any plaintiff. What is the basis for federal-court jurisdiction in your case? [] Federal Question L] Diversity of Citizenship A. If you checked Federal Question Which of your federal constitutional or federal statutory rights have been violated?
B. If you checked Diversity of Citizenship 1. Citizenship of the parties Of what State is each party a citizen? The plaintiff , ,is a citizen of the State of (Plaintiffs name)
(State in which the person resides and intends to remain.) or, if not lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the United States, a citizen or subject of the foreign state of
If more than one plaintiff is named in the complaint, attach additional pages providing information for each additional plaintiff.
Page 2
If the defendant is an individual:
The defendant, , is a citizen of the State of (Defendant’s name)
or, if not lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the United States, a citizen or subject of the foreign state of . If the defendant is a corporation: The defendant, , is incorporated under the laws of the State of and has its principal place of business in the State of or is incorporated under the laws of (foreign state) and has its principal place of business in . If more than one defendant is named in the complaint, attach additional pages providing information for each additional defendant.
II. PARTIES A. Plaintiff Information Provide the following information for each plaintiff named in the complaint. Attach additional pages if needed.
First Name Middle Initial Last Name
Street Address
County, City State Zip Code
Telephone Number Email Address (if available) B. Defendant Information To the best of your ability, provide addresses where each defendant may be served. 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 the same as those listed in the caption. Attach additional pages if needed. Defendant 1: First Name Last Name
Current Job Title (or other identifying information)
Current Work Address (or other address where defendant may be served)
County, City State Zip Code Defendant 2: First Name Last Name
Current Work Address (or other address where defendant may be served)
County, City State Zip Code Defendant 3: First Name Last Name
Current Work Address (or other address where defendant may be served)
County, City State Zip Code Defendant 4: First Name Last Name
Current Work Address (or other address where defendant may be served)
County, City State Zip Code III. 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 what each defendant personally did or failed to do that harmed you. Attach additional pages if needed. INJURIES: If you were injured as a result of these actions, describe your injuries and what medical treatment, if any, you required and received.
IV. RELIEF State briefly what money damages or other relief you want the court to order. V. 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 agree to notify the Clerk's Office in writing of any changes to my mailing 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 Plaintiff's Signature
Telephone Number Email Address (if available)
I have read the Pro Se (Nonprisoner) Consent to Receive Documents Electronically: OlYes If you do consent to receive documents electronically, submit the completed form with your complaint. If you do not consent, please do not attach the form.
Page 7