UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ZEV YOURMAN, Plaintiff, -against- 24-CV-6286 (LTS) COLUMBIA NY PRESBYTERIAN ORDER TO AMEND HOSPITAL; JULIO PUJOLIS JR.; PAUL FREEMAN; J. DOES 1-10, Defendants. LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN, Chief United States District Judge: Plaintiff, who is appearing pro se, brings this action under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 2000d, alleging that Defendants discriminated against him because he is Jewish. By order dated August 21, 2024, 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 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 The following facts are drawn from the complaint.1 On December 8, 2023, at “Columbia Presbyterian[’s]” Allen Hospital, “Plaintiff was peacefully and quietly engaged in Jewish religious observances in a room designated for such activity.” (ECF 1, at 5.) During this time, Security Manager Julio Pujolis and Sergeant Paul Freeman “told Plaintiff he must leave hospital immediately – Freeman told Plaintiff to ‘take your Jewish stuff’ off campus.” (Id.) “Freeman
1 The Court quotes from the complaint verbatim. All spelling, grammar, and punctuation are as in the original unless noted otherwise. escorted Plaintiff all the way to the main road – this action was part of Columbia and affiliated institutions continuing anti-Semitism.” (Id.) DISCUSSION Plaintiff names “Columbia Presbyterian Hospital” as the defendant and describes events occurring at “Allen Hospital.” The Court understands Plaintiff’s claims to be directed at New
York-Presbyterian Allen Hospital and assumes, for the purposes of this order, that (1) Allen Hospital is operated by Columbia University and that (2) Columbia University receives federal funding, an element of a Title VI claim, as discussed below. Because Plaintiff does not state a claim under Title VI, the Court grants him leave to file an amended complaint. A. Title VI claim against Columbia Presbyterian Hospital Title VI prohibits a recipient of federal funds from intentional discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin. Zeno v. Pine Plains Cent. Sch. Dist., 702 F.3d 655, 664 (2d Cir. 2012) (citing 42 U.S.C. § 2000d). “[C]ourts have regularly found that anti-Semitic harassment and discrimination amount to racial discrimination,” in violation of Title VI. T.E. v. Pine Bush Central School Dist., 58 F. Supp.3d 332, 354 (S.D.N.Y. 2014). Here, Plaintiff does not allege enough facts to state a claim under Title VI. First, Plaintiff
does not allege any facts describing his role at Allen Hospital or the reason for his being at the hospital. It is therefore unclear if he worked at the hospital or was an admitted patient or a visitor. Second, it is unclear why Plaintiff was in a room designated for religious observance, who informed him of this room’s availability, and why a security officer and police sergeant were stationed near this room. Finally, it is unclear why Plaintiff was escorted from Allen Hospital to a road, and whether he had a specific right to be at the hospital, either as an employee or a patient. Because the complaint does not state a claim against Defendant, but Plaintiff may be able to allege additional facts that would state a claim, the Court grants Plaintiff 60 days’ leave to file an amended complaint, as detailed below in the Leave to Amend section. B. Title VI claim against the individual defendants Plaintiff names as Defendants Julio Pujolis and Paul Freeman, the two individuals who
allegedly confronted Plaintiff while he was engaged in religious observation. Plaintiff cannot assert claims against these individuals under Title VI, however, because Title VI applies only to entities that receive federal funding. See Goonewardena v. New York, 475 F. Supp. 2d 310, 328 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 14, 2007) (“Title VI claims cannot be asserted against an individual defendant because the individual is not the recipient of federal funding.”). Because a Title VI claim cannot be brought against an individual defendant, Plaintiff cannot state such a claim against Pujolis and Freeman, and the Court dismisses these claims for failure to state a claim on which relief may be granted. See 28 U.S.C.
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 ZEV YOURMAN, Plaintiff, -against- 24-CV-6286 (LTS) COLUMBIA NY PRESBYTERIAN ORDER TO AMEND HOSPITAL; JULIO PUJOLIS JR.; PAUL FREEMAN; J. DOES 1-10, Defendants. LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN, Chief United States District Judge: Plaintiff, who is appearing pro se, brings this action under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 2000d, alleging that Defendants discriminated against him because he is Jewish. By order dated August 21, 2024, 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 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 The following facts are drawn from the complaint.1 On December 8, 2023, at “Columbia Presbyterian[’s]” Allen Hospital, “Plaintiff was peacefully and quietly engaged in Jewish religious observances in a room designated for such activity.” (ECF 1, at 5.) During this time, Security Manager Julio Pujolis and Sergeant Paul Freeman “told Plaintiff he must leave hospital immediately – Freeman told Plaintiff to ‘take your Jewish stuff’ off campus.” (Id.) “Freeman
1 The Court quotes from the complaint verbatim. All spelling, grammar, and punctuation are as in the original unless noted otherwise. escorted Plaintiff all the way to the main road – this action was part of Columbia and affiliated institutions continuing anti-Semitism.” (Id.) DISCUSSION Plaintiff names “Columbia Presbyterian Hospital” as the defendant and describes events occurring at “Allen Hospital.” The Court understands Plaintiff’s claims to be directed at New
York-Presbyterian Allen Hospital and assumes, for the purposes of this order, that (1) Allen Hospital is operated by Columbia University and that (2) Columbia University receives federal funding, an element of a Title VI claim, as discussed below. Because Plaintiff does not state a claim under Title VI, the Court grants him leave to file an amended complaint. A. Title VI claim against Columbia Presbyterian Hospital Title VI prohibits a recipient of federal funds from intentional discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin. Zeno v. Pine Plains Cent. Sch. Dist., 702 F.3d 655, 664 (2d Cir. 2012) (citing 42 U.S.C. § 2000d). “[C]ourts have regularly found that anti-Semitic harassment and discrimination amount to racial discrimination,” in violation of Title VI. T.E. v. Pine Bush Central School Dist., 58 F. Supp.3d 332, 354 (S.D.N.Y. 2014). Here, Plaintiff does not allege enough facts to state a claim under Title VI. First, Plaintiff
does not allege any facts describing his role at Allen Hospital or the reason for his being at the hospital. It is therefore unclear if he worked at the hospital or was an admitted patient or a visitor. Second, it is unclear why Plaintiff was in a room designated for religious observance, who informed him of this room’s availability, and why a security officer and police sergeant were stationed near this room. Finally, it is unclear why Plaintiff was escorted from Allen Hospital to a road, and whether he had a specific right to be at the hospital, either as an employee or a patient. Because the complaint does not state a claim against Defendant, but Plaintiff may be able to allege additional facts that would state a claim, the Court grants Plaintiff 60 days’ leave to file an amended complaint, as detailed below in the Leave to Amend section. B. Title VI claim against the individual defendants Plaintiff names as Defendants Julio Pujolis and Paul Freeman, the two individuals who
allegedly confronted Plaintiff while he was engaged in religious observation. Plaintiff cannot assert claims against these individuals under Title VI, however, because Title VI applies only to entities that receive federal funding. See Goonewardena v. New York, 475 F. Supp. 2d 310, 328 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 14, 2007) (“Title VI claims cannot be asserted against an individual defendant because the individual is not the recipient of federal funding.”). Because a Title VI claim cannot be brought against an individual defendant, Plaintiff cannot state such a claim against Pujolis and Freeman, and the Court dismisses these claims for failure to state a claim on which relief may be granted. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). 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
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 a valid Title VI claim against New York-Presbyterian Allen Hospital, the Court grants Plaintiff 60 days’ leave to amend his complaint to detail his claims. If Plaintiff seeks to bring other claims against the individual defendants, he must state specific facts showing their personal involvement in violating his rights. 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. REFERRAL TO CITY BAR JUSTICE CENTER’S PRO SE CLINIC Plaintiff is advised that there is a pro se clinic available to assist self-represented parties in civil cases. The clinic may be able to provide Plaintiff with advice in connection with her case. The clinic is run by a private organization called the City Bar Justice Center; it is not part of, or run by, the Court (and, among other things, therefore cannot accept filings on behalf of the Court, which must still be made by any self-represented party through the Pro Se Intake Unit). To make an appointment, Plaintiff must complete the City Bar Justice Center’s intake form. If Plaintiff has questions about the intake form or needs to highlight an urgent deadline already disclosed in the form, the clinic can be contacted by phone (212-382-4794) or email
(fedprosdny@nycbar.org). In-person appointments in the Thurgood Marshall Courthouse in Manhattan and the Charles L. Brieant Jr. Federal Building and Courthouse in White Plains are available Monday through Thursday, 10am to 4pm. Appointments are also available remotely Monday through Friday, 10am to 4pm. 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-6286 (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 dismisses Plaintiff’s Title VI claims against Defendants Pujolis and Freeman for failure to state a claim. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). Plaintiff may receive court documents by email by completing the attached form, Consent to Electronic Service.2
2 If Plaintiff consents to receive documents by email, Plaintiff will no longer receive court documents by regular mail. 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 13, 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
CV. TOSI Includ ber if has b Write the full name of each plaintiff. evened) “ees
against AMENDED
□ COMPLAINT ee Do you want a jury trial? LlYes ULINo
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 (Plaintiff's 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. lagree 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: OYes [LINo 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
7-4 ed LO) ee I Be Yoda = en] eas eS New □□ amaatsuctelel mal>)aam Di i-ia ae) mm {h)\\am Zola. ec DI ND □□□ NAVAS
ABOUT THE PROJECT The Federal Pro Se Legal Assistance Project (Fed Pro) provides limited assistance to self- represented litigants (plaintiffs and defendants) with cases involving civil legal matters in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (SDNY).
HOW TO SCHEDULE AN APPOINTMENT
To schedule an appointment for assistance with City Bar Justice [m] “a = □□□ Center’s Fed Pro project, you must first complete our online oi Fe ' Poss re toe Intake Form. pag ea e Our online Intake Form is accessible via one of these ap □□ methods: fg Pia o Scan the QR code to the right. 2 i Go to bit.ly/prosesdny [m] Por e Once onthe City Bar Justice Center Federal Pro Se Legal Assistance page, scroll down to " "and then click " "to be taken to the Intake Form. e When the Intake Form asks: "How can we help you", please select "Federal Court Case" from the drop-down menu. The Fed Pro SDNY office will receive your application ONLY if you select "federal court case." If you select anything else, you will need to re-complete your application. Once you complete the form, someone will contact you, usually within five business days, to schedule an appointment. If you are not able to complete the Intake Form, please call (212) 382-4794, leave a detailed message, and wait for us to call you back, typically within five business days.
HOW WE HELP
aVAK=MaY met-valavel melee atel(-M alli □□□ e) a-t-1-1aie-1 ae) a \{-mor-] gMe-1-so □□□ aoe ©) @ODVAL aT h=xe btctoro) avd fol el ne he O @Xollat-1-1 □□ at-a-)ele hm olen -valai-l mactel-le-) Oto) aU) AMT □□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□ a, ol Tinie oa fe) ancom mi ilar-wcie 22 Anes Waic-a elas Tele □□□ Tint iay-mkctel-l 22 ae Vaclatem melet=tolel a= Ae laelassomelaro ele □□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□ ebm M-Xe Mo) E-F- Lelia} -4omel ale!