Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Taylor v. Fludd

United States District Court, E.D. New York

January 9, 2020

DAMON TAYLOR, Plaintiff,
v.
VERA FLUDD, Sheriff and NASSAU COUNTY CORRECTIONAL CENTER, Defendants.

          For Plaintiff: Damon Taylor, pro se

         For Defendants: No appearances.

          MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

          JOANNA SEYBERT, U.S.D.J.

         On September 6, 2019, incarcerated pro se plaintiff Damon Taylor (“Plaintiff”) filed a Complaint in this Court pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (“Section 1983”) against Nassau County Sheriff Vera Fludd (“Sheriff Fludd”), and the Nassau County Correctional Center (the “Jail” and together, “Defendants”). Plaintiff filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis with the Complaint. (See IFP Mot., D.E. 2.)

         Upon review of the declaration in support of the application to proceed in forma pauperis, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff's request to proceed in forma pauperis. However, for the reasons that follow, the Complaint is sua sponte DISMISSED pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii), 1915A(b)(1).

         BACKGROUND[1]

         Plaintiff's brief handwritten Complaint is submitted on the Court's Section 1983 complaint form. In its entirety, Plaintiff alleges that:[2]

Camera(s) was placed in “strip search” area of the visiting room here at the Nassau County Correctional Center on or about June 12th, 2019. These camera(s) viewed and possibly recorder Petitioner naked during the “strip search” process once Petitioner completed his visits(s) on the following date(s): June 13th, June 17th, June 18th, June 20th, June 24th, July 1st, and July 3rd, all of these date(s) are of the year 2019.

         (Compl. ¶ III.) In the space on the form Complaint that calls for a description of any claimed injuries, Plaintiff alleges that “[n]o physical injuries are being claimed” but he “has suffered from mental and emotional duress due to these violations of his human and civil rights.” (Compl. ¶ IV.A.) As a result of the foregoing, Plaintiff seeks to recover an unspecified sum of “monetary damages and any other relief that this Court may deem just and proper.” (Compl. at 6.)

         DISCUSSION

         I. In Forma Pauperis Application

         Upon review of Plaintiff's declaration in support of the application to proceed in forma pauperis, the Court finds that Plaintiff is qualified to commence this action without prepayment of the filing fees. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1). Therefore, Plaintiff's request to proceed in forma pauperis is GRANTED.

         II. Application of 28 U.S.C. § 1915

         Section 1915 of Title 28 requires a district court to dismiss an in forma pauperis complaint if the action is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(i)-(iii), 1915A(b). The Court is required to dismiss the action as soon as it makes such a determination. See id. § 1915A(b); Liner v. Goord, 196 F.3d 132, 134 & n.1 (2d Cir. 1999) ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.