Sanchez v. Nassau Cnty.

PIERRE SANCHEZ, Pro se Plaintiff, v. NASSAU COUNTY, CORRECTION OFFICERS JOHN DOES 1-5,ARMOR MEDICAL GROUP, NASSAU COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT,and SHERIFF MICHAEL SPOSATO, Defendants.

CV 17-7335 (JFB) (AKT)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

February 28, 2019

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

A. KATHLEEN TOMLINSON, U.S. Magistrate Judge:

I. PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

Pro se Plaintiff Pierre Sanchez ("Plaintiff") brings the instant action against Defendants Nassau County, certain corrections officers at the Nassau County Correctional Center ("NCCC"), the Nassau County Sheriff's Department, and Nassau county Sheriff Michael Sposato (collectively, the "County Defendants"), along with Armor Medical Group ("Armor") (collectively, "Defendants"), alleging multiple constitutional violations. See generally Plaintiff's Amended Complaint ("Am. Compl.") [DE 19-1]. Plaintiff's claims arise out of an attack he alleges he suffered at the hands of several other inmates while in the recreation yard of the NCCC. See generally id. Presently before the Court are three motions: (1) Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment [DE 27]; (2) Armor's motion to dismiss the claims against it [DE 47]; and (3) a second motion for summary judgment filed by Plaintiff [DE 52].

Judge Bianco referred all three motions to this Court for a Report and Recommendation as to whether the motions should be granted. See DE 56. For the reasons set forth below, this Court respectfully recommends to Judge Bianco that Plaintiff's motions for summary judgment be DENIED and that Armor's motion to dismiss be GRANTED.

II. BACKGROUND

A. The Allegations in Plaintiff's Pleadings¹

Judge Bianco has designated as the operative pleading Plaintiff's Amended Complaint which was filed on May 14, 2018 and which utilizes the Eastern District's standard pro se form complaint. See DE 22. The Court therefore takes the following allegations from this pleading and accepts them as true for purposes of analyzing Defendants' motion to dismiss.² See Aegis Ins. Servs., Inc. v. 7 World Trade Co., L.P., 737 F.3d 166, 176 (2d Cir. 2013). However, the Court does not credit conclusory statements, legal conclusions, or unwarranted deductions. See Alston v. Sebelius, No. 13-CV-4537, 2014 WL 4374644, at *5 (E.D.N.Y. Sept. 2, 2014) (explaining that when analyzing the sufficiency of a complaint, "mere conclusions of law or unwarranted deductions need not be accepted").

The events at the center of Plaintiff's lawsuit are not complex. The Court recites Plaintiff's allegations verbatim:

On November 18^th around 15:30 I was slashed from behind. This happened in the wreck yard right in front of corrections officers. I now have an 11 inch scar on my face forever. The implications of which I will be judged for the rest of my life. Employment etc. I am under the care and custody of Nassau County Correctional Center. There are no metal detectors. No "pat-downs." No security measures what so-ever. I was placed in a Max-A unit, when in fact my classification is low. Per my classification and transfer from riker's Island. I am suffering in ways I can't even explain.. . .

On November 18^th I was slashed on the right side of my face from behind in E1B wreck yard. Earlier in the day a C.O. that I have seen before and know by face was on the E1B unit talking to me in front of other inmates threatening me about a situation that was before this very court more than 8-9 years ago. After I was slashed I was informed by C.O.s that they would have more done to me, and were very happy about what had happened already to me. They reminded me of where I was and how easy they could "lose me."

Am Compl. at 6-7.

On his pro se form complaint where he was asked whether or not he pursued a remedy through a prisoner grievance procedure, Plaintiff wrote in both the section indicating that he did file a grievance, as well as in the section indicating that he did not. When asked what steps he took to seek a remedy through a prisoner grievance procedure, he wrote the following: "I called 311 three times when I got to Riker's Island,³ filed two reports in writing. I wrote housing in Nassau before I was transferred to Riker's." Am Compl. at 4. Where he was asked about the result of his grievance, Plaintiff stated: "Nothing, absolutely no results. My life is in so much danger, no help at all." Id. As to why he did not pursue a remedy through a prisoner grievance procedure if he did not, Plaintiff stated as follows: "I was slashed at the behest of the correction[ ] guards. My life was literally in their hands. I begged with tears in my eyes not to transfer me back to this jail for fear of my life. Nobody cares!" Id.

With his Amended Complaint, Plaintiff filed a single page from an online news article regarding an NCCC nurse who pleaded guilty to smuggling cigarettes into the NCCC. See Am. Compl. at 5. Plaintiff also filed a letter to the Court's Pro Se Office with his Amended Complaint. In that letter, Plaintiff recounts his attempts to retain an attorney and further states:

[M]y case speaks for itself. There is a video, the [recreation] yard is extremely small, two officers were right by/adjacent to me. Officers in their official and individual capacity cannot be indifferent or complicit. In fact the officers earlier in the day (early morning) provoked the situation. Then refused to help me, and mocked me immediately afterwards. A prior lawsuit was ("the straw that broke the camel's back") for them. When I was exposed for "snitching" in a lawsuit, prior to the event on November 18, 2017. The inmate who slashed me was doing it at the behest of said officers. From their own mouth to my ears, [ ] all the evidence will show that.

DE 19 at 2.

B. Relevant Procedural Background

Plaintiff filed his initial Complaint in this action on December 18, 2017. See DE 1. The County Defendants filed an Answer to the initial Complaint on March 22, 2018. See DE 12. On March 27, 2018, Plaintiff filed a letter request to Judge Bianco asking that he be permitted to amend his Complaint to include certain Nassau County corrections officers as defendants. See DE 14. In that letter, Plaintiff stated at length the circumstances surrounding the attack he alleges he suffered, as well as his alleged treatment by corrections officials following the attack. See id. He also attached to his letter what appears to be a letter to the New York State Attorney General's Office regarding security at the NCCC, along with an online news article dealing with smuggling and contraband at the NCCC.⁴ See id. On the same day - March 27, 2018 - Plaintiff filed an "Amended Complaint" which named as defendants two unknown corrections officers, Nassau County, and Armor. See DE 15. On May 14, 2018, a second "Amended Complaint" was filed which contained allegations identical to those in the previous Amended Complaint. However, the May 14, 2018 filing named as defendants the County, the Sheriff's Department,Sheriff Michael Sposato, Armor, and five unnamed corrections officers. See DE 19. Along with this second Amended Complaint, Plaintiff filed a letter to the Pro Se Office. See id. Following correspondence from the County Defendants indicating that they did not oppose the amendment, see DE 20, Judge Bianco accepted this second Amended Complaint and designated it the operative pleading in his May 30, 2018 Order. See DE 22.

On June 4, 2018, Plaintiff filed with the Court a thirteen-page correspondence. See DE 24. Labeled as "NOTICE of filing Additional Supplement to the Amended Complaint," this filing purports to assert multiple legal arguments, asks for discovery relief and "punitive damages," and contains multiple factual allegations pertaining to the time period preceding and following the alleged incident on November 18, 2017. See id. Similarly, on June 13, 2017, Plaintiff filed two letters to Judge Bianco. See DE 25. The purpose of these letters is unclear. However, Plaintiff references in them a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction and seeks relief related to his housing situation. See id. He also discusses at length what he considers to be imminent threats to his safety in custody. See generally id. In addition to the letters, Plaintiff submitted assorted legal paperwork, including an order of dismissal of a New York State Court of Claims action commenced by Plaintiff against the State of New York. See id. at 6-7.

Plaintiff filed his first motion for summary judgment on June 28, 2018. See Plaintiff's First Motion for Summary Judgment ("Pl.'s Mot. I") [DE 27]. On July 2, 2018, Plaintiff filed another letter to Judge Bianco raising several complaints and concerns regarding his housing status. See DE 28.

Armor filed a letter request to Judge Bianco on July 12, 2018 seeking a pre-motion conference for purposes of moving to dismiss the claims against it. See DE 33. On July 16,2018, Judge Bianco dispensed with his pre-motion conference requirement and set a briefing schedule for Armor's motion to dismiss. See DE 35. The County Defendants filed their Answer to Plaintiff's Amended Complaint on July 25, 2018. See DE 37. Armor filed its motion to dismiss on August 16, 2018. See Armor's Memorandum in Support of its Motion to Dismiss ("Armor Mem.") [DE 47].

On July 23, 2018, Plaintiff filed two pieces of correspondence with the Court. The first is a letter "making [the Court] aware that [Plaintiff] is filing a complaint against the District Attorney's Office in Queens," along with a complaint against a judge of the New York State Supreme Court. DE 38. This letter contains several allegations regarding Plaintiff's underlying criminal proceeding. See id. The second letter is styled as Plaintiff's "Response to counsel's request for a pre-motion conference," in which Plaintiff states his opposition to the arguments raised by Armor in its letter request for a pre-motion conference. DE 39.

Plaintiff filed his narrative statement of the facts he anticipates presenting at trial on...