United States District Court, S.D. New York
ROBERT A. COLLINS, Plaintiff,
BRIAN FISCHER, Defendants.
A. Collins Stormville, NY Pro Se Plaintiff.
Kuruvilla, Esq., Corporation Counsel of the City of New York
New York, NY Counsel for Defendant City of New York
C. Kramer, Esq., Heidell, Pittoni, Murphy & Bach, LLP New
York, NY Counsel for Defendant Queens Hospital Center.
OPINION & ORDER
KENNETH M. KARAS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
Robert A. Collins ("Plaintiff), currently incarcerated
at Green Haven Correctional Facility ("Green
Haven"), brings this pro se Action under 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983, against Brian Fischer, Commissioner of
Department of Correction and Community Supervision
("Fischer"), William Lee, Former Superintendent of
Green Haven ("Lee"), Downstate Correctional
Facility, Queens Hospital Center, Long Island Jewish
Hospital, Zucker Hillside Medical Center, Flushing Hospital
Medical Center, Creedmore Psychiatric Center, New York State
Office of Mental Health, New York City Police Department, and
New York City Department of Environmental Protection,
(collectively, "Defendants"), alleging that
Defendants violated his constitutional rights. Before the Court
are Motions To Dismiss on behalf of Defendants the City of
New York (the “City”) and Queens Hospital Center
(the “Motions”). (Dkt. Nos. 31,
For the reasons to follow, the Motions are granted.
following facts are drawn from Plaintiff's Second Amended
Complaint (“SAC”) and are taken as true for the
purpose of resolving the instant Motions. As all Defendants
do not join in the instant Motions, the Court only recounts
facts relevant to the alleged conduct of the moving
numerous occasions” from July 1998 to April 27, 1999,
Plaintiff “was stopped by the police, for no apparent
reason.” (Second Am. Compl. (“SAC”) 14-15
(Dkt. No. 11).) On each of these occasions, “[n]o one
else was involved” and Plaintiff “was
alone.” (Id. at 15.) “On several
occasions[, ] [Plaintiff] was made to surrender [his]
identification, ” and his license was then “run
through the computer in a police car.” (Id.)
alleges that on January 28, 1999, he suffered an
“[u]nprovoked attack by then Police Officer, now
Sergeant Tacco” and on April 27, 1999, he was the
victim of an “[u]nlawful invasion of [his] family
residence” by “Derek or Derrick Storey.”
(Id. (internal quotation marks
March 4, 1999, Plaintiff was taken to Queens Hospital Center,
“after having been taken from [his] family
residence.” (Id.) “The [p]olice
unlawfully confiscated picture identifications from
[Plaintiff's] wallet, which also contained [$197]
cash.” (Id.) Upon arrival at Queens Hospital
Center, Plaintiff “was given an injection of some
substance which rendered [him] unconscious, ” and
“[w]hen [h]e came to, [Plaintiff] found that [he] had
been transferred to Beth Israel Medical Center.”
(Id.) At Beth Israel Medical Center, Plaintiff's
wallet was returned to him (without his “identification
photographs”), along with $12 in cash. (Id.)
Plaintiff has “been unable to recover the balance of
[$185]” that was removed from his wallet.
filed the initial Complaint in this Action on January 5,
2015. (Dkt. No. 1.) On February 18, 2015, Plaintiff filed an
Amended Complaint. (Dkt. No. 6.) On March 4, 2015, then-Chief
Judge Loretta A. Preska issued an Order To Amend, dismissing
certain Defendants, identifying deficiencies in
Plaintiff's Amended Complaint, and instructing Plaintiff
to again amend his Complaint. (Dkt. No. 7.) On March 10,
2015, Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint, (Dkt. No. 9),
which Judge Preska found was still deficient; Plaintiff was
thus ordered to again file an amended pleading, (Dkt. No.
10). On April 9, 2015, Plaintiff filed the Second Amended
Complaint, the operative complaint in this Action. (Dkt. No.
15, 2015, Plaintiff's Action was transferred to this
Court. (Dkt. (entry May 15, 2015).) On May 20, 2015, the
Court issued an Order To Show Cause as to why certain
Defendants should not be dismissed, as Plaintiff's claims
against those Defendants were filed on behalf of
Plaintiff's brother's estate. (Dkt. No. 13.) The
Court simultaneously issued an Order of Service with respect
to the remaining Defendants, granting Plaintiff 60 days to
effect service. (Dkt. No. 14.) More than a year later, on
June 30, 2016, the Court issued (1) a second Order To Show
Cause why the Action should not be dismissed in its entirety
for failure to prosecute, (Dkt. No. 17), and (2) an Order
dismissing those Defendants named in the Court's May 20,
2015 Order To Show Cause, (Dkt. No. 18).
letter filed on July 13, 2016, Plaintiff informed the Court
that he “never received” the “U.S. Marshals
Service Process Receipt and Return Forms” to serve
Defendants, (Dkt. No. 19), and on July 18, 2016, the Court
thus ordered that new forms be sent to Plaintiff and granted
Plaintiff 60 additional days to complete service, (Dkt. No.
20). In a letter filed September 13, 2016, Plaintiff informed
the Court that he once again did not receive the forms, (Dkt.
No. 21), and the Court again granted Plaintiff 60 days to
effect service on Defendants, ...