Sign Up for Vincent AI
M.C. v. Cnty. of Westchester, 16-CV-3013 (NSR)
Plaintiff M.C. bring this action against Defendants County of Westchester, New York; Westchester Medical Center; Cheryl Archbald; Irma W. Cosgriff; Ada Huang; Laural Skelson; Germaine Jacquette; Miral A. Subhani; and Sherlita Amler pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging violations of his First, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendment rights. (ECF No. 39.) Plaintiff additionally asserts a number of state tort claims, including claims for false imprisonment, malicious prosecution, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and abuse of process. (Id.)
Presently before the Court is a motion to dismiss the Amended Complaint filed by Westchester Medical Center ("WMC") and Miral A. Subhani (collectively, the "Medical Defendants"), as well as a motion to dismiss the Amended Complaint filed by the County of Westchester, Cherly Archbald, Irma Cosgriff, Ada Huang, Laural Skelson, Germain Jacquette, and Sherlita Amler (collectively, the "County Defendants"). (ECF Nos. 59 & 65.) For the following reasons, the Medical Defendants' motion is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part and the County Defendants' motion is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.
The following facts are derived from the Amended Complaint and are assumed to be true for the purposes of this opinion.
Plaintiff tested positive for tuberculosis ("TB") in early 2015. (Am. Compl. ¶ 20, ECF No. 39.) Once his diagnosis was confirmed, Plaintiff "made extensive efforts to identify a pulmonologist with [TB] expertise who could provide him with the necessary treatment." (Id. ¶ 21.) Indeed, from late January 2015 through late February 2015, Plaintiff contacted at least five different physicians in search of treatment. (Id.)
While Plaintiff was searching for a physician who could treat his TB, representatives of the Westchester County Department of Health ("WCDOH") contacted him. (Id. ¶22.) Among these WCDOH representatives was Defendant Germaine Jacquette, who made inquiries regarding Plaintiff's treatment. (Id.) Plaintiff expressed to the WCDOH that he had a strong preference to be treated by a private physician. (Id. ¶ 23.) Plaintiff further informed the WCDOH that he was actively seeking treatment, but was having trouble scheduling an appointment. (Id.) The WCDOH agreed that it would be appropriate for Plaintiff to be treated privately, so long as his treating physician remained in contact with the WCDOH. (Id. ¶ 24.) Defendant Jacquette even offered to assist Plaintiff in his search for a private physician. (Id.)
WCDOH representatives also asked Plaintiff to undergo a chest X-ray at Montefiore New Rochelle Hospital ("MNRH") and provide samples of his sputum for testing. (Id. ¶ 25.) Plaintiff complied with both of the WCDOH's requests. (Id.) While he was being examined at MNRH, hospital personnel initially offered to provide Plaintiff a prescription for TBmedication. (Id. ¶ 26.) However, after speaking with Defendant Huang, hospital personnel refused to provide such medication to Plaintiff, despite Plaintiff's numerous requests for medication. (Id. ¶ 27.) Instead, Defendant Jacquette suggested that Plaintiff be treated by Dr. Jeffrey Lederman, a Westchester-based pulmonologist. (Id.) Plaintiff agreed to see Dr. Lederman if he was unable to get an appointment with any of the doctors with whom he was attempting to arrange treatment, and an appointment was made for Plaintiff to see Dr. Lederman a few days later. (Id. ¶¶ 27-28.)
Before his scheduled appointment with Dr. Lederman, however, Plaintiff was able to secure an appointment with Dr. Joseph Cooke, a pulmonologist and the chairman at the Department of Medicine at New York-Presbyterian Queens Hospital. (Id. ¶ 29.) Because Plaintiff preferred to be treated by Dr. Cooke, he cancelled his previously scheduled appointment with Dr. Lederman. (Id. ¶ 30.) Plaintiff informed the WCDOH that his newly-obtained private doctor would keep the department apprised of Plaintiff's treatment. (Id. ¶ 31.)
Despite Plaintiff's successful efforts to obtain treatment for his TB, Defendant Irma W. Cosgriff submitted an Order to Show Cause, a verified petition, and supporting affidavits to the Westchester County Supreme Court seeking an order authorizing the involuntary confinement of Plaintiff for TB treatment on March 2, 2015. (Id. ¶ 32.) The petition was verified by Defendant Cheryl Archbald and the supporting affidavits were sworn by the Defendants Ada Huang and Laural Skelson. (Id.) These submissions were replete with falsehoods and material omissions regarding Plaintiff's efforts to obtain treatment. (Id. ¶ 33.) Defendant Archbald's petition falsely claimed that Plaintiff had "failed to comply with follow up medical appointments and to take any medications necessary for the treatment of his active TB and to prevent the spread of this contagious disease." (Id. ¶ 34.) Similarly, Defendant Haung's affidavit falsely claimed thatPlaintiff had been "unwilling to voluntarily comply with medical treatment of his TB," despite Plaintiff's diligent efforts to find a physician who would treat him. (Id. ¶ 35.) Defendant Skelson's sworn affidavit likewise erroneously claimed that Plaintiff "intentionally avoided treatment for his TB on several occasions." (Id. ¶ 36.) Not one of Defendants' submissions to the Westchester County Supreme Court made any mention of Plaintiff's diligent—and successful—efforts to obtain treatment from a private physician, or of WCDOH's agreement that treatment by a private physician would be appropriate. (Id. ¶¶ 35-38.)
The Westchester County Court signed the Order to Show Cause on March 3, 2015 and set a hearing for the very next day. (Id. ¶ 39.) Plaintiff never received any notice of the March 4 hearing and, thus, failed to appear. (Id. ¶¶ 40-41.) Based on the misrepresentations made by Defendants Cosgriff, Huang, Skelson, and Archbald, the Westchester County Court issued an Order authorizing Plaintiff's involuntary hospitalization for tuberculosis treatment on March 4, 2018. (Id. ¶ 42.)
Defendants failed to execute the Westchester Court's order for 51 days because they were aware that Plaintiff was receiving treatment on an out-patient basis from Dr. Cooke. (Id. ¶¶ 44-45.) During that time, defendants had access to Plaintiff's pharmacy records, which reflected that Plaintiff was diligently filling his TB medication subscription. (Id. ¶ 48.) Further, Defendants were apprised of Plaintiff's compliance with his treatment by Dr. Cooke, who saw no reason to involuntarily confine Plaintiff to ensure his ongoing cooperation. (Id. ¶ 49.)
On April 23, 2015, Plaintiff was apprehended outside of the office building of a medical specialist with whom Plaintiff had an appointment, and was transported involuntarily to Westchester Medical Center ("WMC"). (Id. ¶ 50.) Defendants held Plaintiff in isolation at WMC against his will for nearly two months. (Id. ¶ 53.)
Shortly after the beginning of his confinement, Plaintiff filed his first notice of claim against Defendants. (Id. ¶ 56.) In retaliation, Defendants thereafter unnecessarily prolonged Plaintiff's confinement. (Id.) Indeed, Plaintiff alleges that the doctor who oversaw his treatment during his time at WMC, Defendant Miral Subhani, initially told him that he would be released if three consecutive rapid diagnostic tests for tuberculosis came back negative. (Id. ¶ 58.) Plaintiff complied with Defendant's request for samples, and all three test results were negative. (Id.) As a result, WMC removed Plaintiff's "contagious" designation and Defendant Subhani began to enter Plaintiff's room without a mask, and even remarked that she "was surprised Plaintiff was still at WMC." (Id.) A few days later, however, Defendant Subhani resumed wearing a mask when she interacted with Plaintiff. (Id. ¶ 59.) When Plaintiff inquired the reason for this change and why he had yet to be released, Defendant Subhani suggested that Plaintiff contact his attorney and stated, in sum and substance, "Now it's a lawyer's game." (Id. ¶ 60.)
On May 18, 2015, Defendant Cosgriff submitted an Order to Show Cause and swore a supporting affirmation seeking judicial authorization for Plaintiff's continued involuntary confinement. (Id. ¶ 61.) Defendants Huang and Amler submitted supporting affidavits, which again provided the Court with misleading information. (Id. ¶ 61-62.) Specifically, Defendants Huang and Amler both falsely informed the Court in their affidavits that Plaintiff could not be "relied upon to participate in and/or to complete an appropriate prescribed course of medication" for his tuberculosis. (Id. ¶ 63.) Both Defendants notably failed to include any information regarding Plaintiff's continued cooperation with his treatment and medication regimen or Plaintiff's negative TB test results. (Id. ¶ 64 -65.)
On June 18, 2015, the Westchester County Supreme Court held a second hearing concerning Plaintiff's medical commitment at WMC. (Id. ¶ 67.) Plaintiff was able to participateat the hearing and was represented by counsel. (Id.) Under pressure from the court, Defendants agreed that Plaintiff could be released from isolation so long as he agreed to continue treatment on an outpatient basis. (Id. ¶ 68.) Defendants requested that Plaintiff sign an agreement releasing them from civil liability for his commitment as a condition of his release. (Id. ¶ 69.) However, Defendants abandoned that request under pressure from the Court. (Id.)
The Westchester County Supreme Court ordered that Plaintiff be released within 24 hours of the June 18th hearing. (Id. ¶ 70.) At approximately five in the...
Experience vLex's unparalleled legal AI
Access millions of documents and let Vincent AI power your research, drafting, and document analysis — all in one platform.
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting