Trotman v. Warden of DOC NYC

District Court, S.D. New York·Decided February 28, 2025·No. 1:24-cv-08455·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK DAVID M. TROTMAN, Plaintiff, 24-CV-8455 (LTS)

-against- ORDER

WARDEN OF DOC NYC, Defendants. LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN, Chief United States District Judge: Plaintiff filed this complaint in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York. By order dated September 3, 2024, the district court found that, before bringing this action, Plaintiff had accrued at least three “strikes,” for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), that he was not in imminent danger of serious physical injury, and that he was therefore barred from proceeding in forma pauperis while a prisoner. (Text Order entered November 6, 2024.) The district court granted Plaintiff leave to pay the filing fee within 30 days. Plaintiff responded by filing motions to amend his complaint and for reconsideration of the order denying IFP. (ECF Nos. 6-9.) On November 4, 2024, the district court transferred the action to this court. For the reasons set forth below, the Court directs Plaintiff to file his amended complaint within 30 days of the date of this order and defers addressing his IFP application. DISCUSSION Under Rule 15 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a plaintiff has the right to amend the complaint once, without permission of the court, within a certain time frame after service of the complaint. Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a). The United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York held that Plaintiff’s complaint failed to show that he was in imminent danger of serious physical injury, and Plaintiff moved for leave to file an amended complaint. (ECF 6-9.) Under Rule 15, because summonses have not issued and service of process on defendants has not been effected, Plaintiff can file an amended complaint once without court order. Moreover, the availability of an exception to Section 1915(g)’s bar on proceeding IFP turns, in part, on the nexus between the claims in the complaint and the asserted danger. The Court therefore defers

resolution of Plaintiff’s request to reconsider the decision denying IFP until it has reviewed Plaintiff’s amended complaint. The Court directs Plaintiff to file his amended complaint within 30 days of the date of this order. If Plaintiff chooses to file an amended complaint, Plaintiff must provide a short and plain statement explaining what each defendant did or failed to do that violated his rights. Plaintiff’s complaint should be legibly written in handwriting that is large enough to read. Plaintiff should include: a) the names and titles of relevant people; b) a description of relevant events, including what each defendant did or failed to do, the approximate date and time of the event, and the general location where the 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 rights; 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. Importantly, the Court notes that “[u]nrelated claims against different defendants belong in different suits . . . .” Webb v. Maldanado, No. 13-CV-144 (RNC), 2013 WL 3243135, at *3 (D. Conn. June 26, 2013). Rule 18 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure permits a plaintiff to join as many claims as he has against a particular defendant. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 18(a). Rule 20(a)(2) permits a plaintiff to join multiple defendants in one action only if: (1) a right to relief is asserted against all of the defendants, or the claims arise out of the same transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions, and (2) questions of law or fact are common to all defendants. See Deskovic v. City of Peekskill, 673 F. Supp. 2d 154, 167 (S.D.N.Y. 2009). If Plaintiff files an amended

complaint, the Court directs him to include only those claims that are properly joined in a single action, which generally means either (1) all of the claims that he has against a single defendant, or (2) claims against different defendants arising out of the same incident. CONCLUSION The Court grants Plaintiff’s motions for leave to amend (ECF 8, 9), and Plaintiff is directed to file his amended complaint, which must be legibly handwritten or typed, within 30 days of the date of this order. The Court also grants Plaintiff an opportunity to file a written declaration, within 30 days, showing that the claims in his amended complaint have some nexus or connection to an imminent danger of serious physical injury that he faces. An amended complaint form and declaration form are attached to this order. If Plaintiff does not file an amended complaint, the Court will address whether his

motions to alter or amend the judgment (ECF Nos. 6-7) demonstrate any basis for reconsidering the decision that he is not entitled to proceed IFP. 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: February 28, 2025 New York, New York

/s/ Laura Taylor Swain LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN Chief United States District Judge UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

CVE Write the full name of each plaintiff. (Include case number if one has been assigned)

“against- COMPLAINT (Prisoner) Do you want a jury trial? ssssssss...0.0.0. L1Yes LINo

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.

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

Trotman v. Warden of DOC NYC, (S.D.N.Y. 2025).

Trotman v. Warden of DOC NYC (Trotman v. Warden of DOC NYC) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Coppedge v. United States
369 U.S. 438 (Supreme Court, 1962)
DESKOVIC v. City of Peekskill
673 F. Supp. 2d 154 (S.D. New York, 2009)