United States District Court, W.D. New York
DECISION AND ORDER
CHARLES J. SIRAGUSA, District Judge.
Plaintiff, who was formerly incarcerated in the Monroe County Jail, alleges that Defendants committed various intentional New York state-law torts against him, and also violated his federal constitutional rights. Now before the Court is Defendants' motion (Docket No. [#11]) for judgment on the pleadings. The application is granted in part and denied in part.
Defendant has moved for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Fed.R.Civ. P. 12(c). In deciding such a motion, the Court is limited as to what it can consider:
In ruling on a 12(b)(6) motion, and thus on a 12(c) motion, a court may consider the complaint as well as "any written instrument attached to [the complaint] as an exhibit or any statements or documents incorporated in it by reference." Yak v. Bank Brussels Lambert, 252 F.3d 127, 130 (2d Cir.2001) (internal quotation marks omitted). Moreover, "on a motion to dismiss, a court may consider... matters of which judicial notice may be taken, [and] documents either in plaintiffs' possession or of which plaintiffs had knowledge and relied on in bringing suit." Chambers v. Time Warner, Inc., 282 F.3d 147, 153 (2d Cir.2002) (internal quotation marks omitted).
Kalyanaram v. American Ass'n of University Professors at New York Institute of Technology, Inc., 742 F.3d 42, 44 (2d Cir. 2014).
In the instant case, the Court's review is limited to the Complaint that Plaintiff filed in New York State Supreme Court, Monroe County, which was later removed to this Court. The Complaint purports to assert five separate causes of action, as follows: 1) a state-law tort claim for assault against Deputy Geiger; 2) a state-law tort claim for battery against Deputy Geiger; 3) a state-law tort claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress against Deputy Geiger; 4) a state-law negligence claim against Monroe County and the Monroe County Sheriff, based upon negligent hiring, supervision and training; and 5) a federal claim, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, against Geiger, Monroe County, and the Monroe County Sheriff, for violation of Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment.
The only true factual assertions in the Complaint underlying these causes of action are the following statements:
That on or about the 20th day of September, 2011, in the County of Monroe... Plaintiff was an inmate at the Monroe County Jail and Defendant, Deputy Geiger[, ] was employed as a guard at the Monroe County Jail.
* * *
That on or about September 20, 2011, the Defendant Geiger intentionally and wrongfully held Claimant down on his bed; placed his hand around Plaintiff's neck choking the Plaintiff and cutting off his air supply all without the Plaintiff's consent.
Complaint ¶¶ 7, 8, 13. Otherwise, the Complaint's allegations concerning the particular causes of action consist of conclusory statements that merely mirror the elements of the various causes of action. See, e.g., Complaint ¶ 7 ("That on or about the 20th day of September, 2011, in the County of Monroe, Defendant Deputy Geiger intentionally placed the Plaintiff in imminent fear of harmful and offensive contact.").
Additionally, the Complaint indicates that Plaintiff "duly filed and served a Notice of Claim upon [the] Defendants on the 2nd day of December, 2011 as required by § 50-e ...