Bell v. NYS Corr. Officer Saunders

Inmate's Procedural Due Process Claim Against Corrections Officer Dismissed

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiff Herman Bell brings this action under 42 U.S.C. §1983, alleging that during his incarceration at Great Meadow¹ Correctional Facility (“Great Meadow”), Defendant Corrections Officers (“C.O.’s”) Jeremy Saunders, Christopher Winchell,² Anthony Wetherby, Patrick Brockway, and Justin Quain subjected him to excessive force and/or failed to intervene to prevent this use of force in violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments. (Dkt. No. 56). Plaintiff further alleges that Defendants violated his Fourteenth Amendment right to procedural due process when they initiated a disciplinary proceeding against him based on false reports, leading to his placement in a “Segregated Housing Unit” (“SHU”) where he was subjected to restrictive conditions of confinement. (Id.). Presently before the Court is Defendant Christopher Winchell’s motion to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), arguing that the applicable statute of limitations bars Plaintiff’s claims against him, and that Plaintiff’s due process claim must be dismissed for failure to plead a protected liberty interest. (Dkt. No. 69). Plaintiff opposed the motion, (Dkt. No. 76), and Defendant Christopher Winchell replied, (Dkt. No. 77). For the reasons discussed below, the motion to dismiss is granted in part. II. FACTS³ On September 5, 2017, Plaintiff was incarcerated at Great Meadow in Westchester County, New York. (Dkt. No. 56, 6). That day, at around 10:00 a.m., Defendant C.O.’s Saunders, Christopher Winchell, Wetherby, and Brockway “assaulted” Plaintiff “without provocation” around the steps to the mess hall foyer. (Id. 8). Defendant C.O. Quain failed to intervene to stop the assault despite having “the opportunity to” do so. (Id. 9). As a result of this incident, Plaintiff “suffered a concussion, a serious knee injury, eye damage, multiple brokenribs, bruising, and emotional distress” and he was “denied adequate medical care in response to his injuries.” (Id.

Bell v. NYS Corr. Officer Saunders

Inmate's Procedural Due Process Claim Against Corrections Officer Dismissed

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to New York Law Journal