District Court, S.D. New York, 2023

Romero v. BronxCare Hospital

Romero v. BronxCare Hospital
District Court, S.D. New York · Decided August 28, 2023
Romero v. BronxCare Hospital

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK JESUS ROMERO, SR., Plaintiff, 23-CV-3708 (LTS) -against- ORDER TO AMEND BRONXCARE HOSPITAL, Defendant.

LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN, Chief United States District Judge: Plaintiff, who is appearing pro se, brings this action under the Court’s federal question jurisdiction, alleging that Defendant violated his rights. By order dated August 11, 2023, the Court granted Plaintiff’s request to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP), that is, without prepayment of fees. For the reasons set forth below, the Court grants Plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint within 60 days of the date of this order.

STANDARD OF REVIEW The Court must dismiss an IFP complaint, or any portion of the complaint, that is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B); see Livingston v. Adirondack Beverage Co., 141 F.3d 434, 437 (2d Cir. 1998). The Court must also dismiss a complaint when the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction of the claims raised. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3).

While the law mandates dismissal on any of these grounds, the Court is obliged to construe pro se pleadings liberally, Harris v. Mills, 572 F.3d 66, 72 (2d Cir. 2009), and interpret them to raise the “strongest [claims] that they suggest,” Triestman v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons, 470 F.3d 471, 474 (2d Cir. 2006) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted) (emphasis in original). But the “special solicitude” in pro se cases, id. at 475 (citation omitted), has its limits – to state a claim, pro se pleadings still must comply with Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which requires a complaint to make a short and plain statement showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.

Rule 8 requires a complaint to include enough facts to state a claim for relief “that is plausible on its face.” Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007). A claim is facially plausible if the plaintiff pleads enough factual detail to allow the Court to draw the inference that the defendant is liable for the alleged misconduct. In reviewing the complaint, the Court must accept all well-pleaded factual allegations as true. Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678-79 (2009). But it does not have to accept as true “[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action,” which are essentially just legal conclusions. Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555. After separating legal conclusions from well-pleaded factual allegations, the Court must determine whether those facts make it plausible – not merely possible – that the pleader is entitled to relief. Id. BACKGROUND Plaintiff filed this complaint against BronxCare Hospital and invokes “Title 21 U.S.C. sub-section 360bbb- 3;” “NYC Administrative Code, title 18 chapter 4-8-402;” “NYC Rights Article 4 sub-40-c;” “Title 18 U.S.C. 242;” “title 18 U.S.C. 241;” Title 3, ADA sub 36.101;” and U.S.C. sub 12181-(7).”1 (ECF No. 1 at ¶ I.A.) The following facts are drawn from the complaint.

On December 19, 2022, Plaintiff, his son, and his son’s mother, went to the emergency room at BronxCare Hospital in Bronx County, New York, because his son “had his right ear with

1 The Court quotes the complaint verbatim. All spelling, punctuation, and grammar are as in the original. a swollen gland.” (Id. at 9.) Security Officer Perez came over and began “harassing my family to put on a mask,” and Plaintiff responded that he would not put on a mask because “it goes against Federal Law Title 21 USC § 360bbb-3.” (Id.) Officer Perez became more aggressive and insisted that no one could be in the emergency room without a mask, and that Plaintiff must leave.

Officer Perez escorted Plaintiff out of the hospital and “made my son and his mother put on a mask while I was outside.” (Id.) Plaintiff claims that the hospital’s requirement that he and his family wear a mask, goes against [Section 360bbb-3], where it clearly states that no emergency use authorized medical devices cannot be mandated, such as mask, face coverings, PCR Test and COVID19 Vaccines. (Id.) According to Plaintiff, “a refusal for an emergency use authorized product is a right.” (Id.) Plaintiff alleges that the experience left him “emotionally distressed,” for which he seeks money damages. (Id. at ¶ IV.) Plaintiff also seeks an order For relief I also want BronxCare Hospital Emergency rm to not require me + my son to wear a mask if some day either one of us was to get ill, or injured, in whichever office, or room we’re in. Also, if my son ever gets sick, or injured, + he was to go in BronxCare emergency rm that they will also allow more than 1 parent to enter in with our son instead of just 1 parent + without masks.

Or general, take off mask requirements since it goes against Federal Law U.S. Code 21 sub-sect. 360bbb-3[.] (Id. at 7.)

On the same day that Plaintiff filed this complaint, he filed a substantially similar complaint against Bellevue Hospital. See Romero v. Bellevue Hosp., ECF 1:23-CV-3706, 1 (S.D.N.Y. June 20, 2023) (dismissing Plaintiff’s complaint for failure to state a claim but granting Plaintiff 60 days’ leave to file an amended complaint).

DISCUSSION A. Claims on behalf of others The provision governing appearances in federal court, 28 U.S.C. § 1654, allows two types of representation: “that by an attorney admitted to the practice of law by a governmental regulatory body, and that by a person representing himself.” Eagle Assocs. v. Bank of Montreal, 926 F.2d 1305, 1308 (2d Cir. 1991) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). Generally, a non-attorney parent cannot bring an action on behalf of his minor child in federal court without counsel. See Tindall v. Poultney High Sch. Dist., 414 F.3d 281, 284 (2d Cir. 2005). Additionally, “because pro se means to appear for one’s self, a person may not appear on another person’s behalf in the other’s cause. A person must be litigating an interest personal to him.” Iannaccone v. Law, 142 F.3d 553, 558 (2d Cir. 1998); Cheung v. Youth Orch. Found. of Buffalo, Inc., 906 F.2d 59, 61 (2d Cir. 1990) (“[I]t is not in the interests of minors . . . that they be represented by non-attorneys.”). Allegations in this complaint could be construed as raising claims on behalf of Plaintiff’s son and his son’s mother, but only Plaintiff’s name is listed in the caption of the complaint, and only Plaintiff signed the complaint. Because Plaintiff has alleged no facts suggesting that he is an attorney, he may not assert claims on behalf of his son and his son’s mother.2

2 The Southern District has previously found that a parent of a child had standing to challenge a mask mandate requiring the child to mask at school. See Donohue v. Hochul, No. 21- CV-8463 (JPO), 2022 WL 673636, at *4 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 7, 2022), vacated and remanded on other grounds, Farrell v. Hochul, No. 22-5517, 2023 WL 3014758 (2d Cir. Apr. 20, 2023). Even if this Court were to allow Plaintiff to challenge the mask policy on behalf of his son under the third-party standing doctrine, Plaintiff would still need to plead additional facts establishing that the treatment his son experienced constitutes a valid legal claim under an applicable federal or state law.

B. Claim under the ADA The ADA prohibits discrimination against the disabled in major areas of life. The statute consists of three parts: Title I, 42 U.S.C. § 12111 et seq., which prohibits discrimination in employment; Title II, 42 U.S.C. § 12131 et seq., which prohibits discrimination by public entities; and Title III, 42 U.S.C. § 12181 et seq., which prohibits discrimination in access to public accommodations. PGA Tour, Inc. v. Martin, 532 U.S. 661, 675 (2001). Although Plaintiff invokes Title III of the ADA, his assertions implicate Title II, the provision providing that no person shall be excluded from participation in or be denied the benefits of a public entity by reason of a disability. See 42 U.S.C. § 12132.3 To state a claim under Title II of the ADA, a plaintiff must allege that he has a qualified disability, that the defendant is subject to the statute, and that he was denied access to covered services, programs, or activities because of his disability. See McElwee v. Cnty. of Orange, 700 F.3d 635, 640 (2d Cir. 2012). In other words, the plaintiff must allege that his mistreatment “was motivated by either discriminatory animus or ill will due to disability,” because the purpose of the ADA is “to ensure evenhanded treatment between the disabled and the able-bodied.” Feliz v. City of New York, No. 18-CV-5023 (PAE) (SN), 2019 WL 6831552, at *9 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 5, 2019) (citing Garcia v. S.U.N.Y. Health Scis. Ctr. of Bklyn., 280 F.3d 98, 112 (2d Cir. 1998)), report and recommendation adopted, 2019 WL 4386017 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 13, 2019).

The ADA defines a disability as “[a] physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities . . . or being regarded as having such an impairment.” 42

3 Plaintiff’s claims may also implicate the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. § 794, which prohibits disability-based discrimination in federally funded programs. See Bryant v. N.Y. Educ. Dep’t, 692 F.3d 202, 216 (2d Cir. 2012). Claims under the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act are analyzed similarly. Wright v. N.Y. State Dep’t of Corr., 831 F.3d 64, 72 (2d Cir. 2016).

U.S.C. § 12102(1)(a-c). The statute requires that disabled individuals receive “reasonable accommodations” that allow them to have access to and take a meaningful part in public services. Henrietta D. v. Bloomberg, 331 F.3d 261, 273-74 (2d Cir. 2003).

Even based on a liberal reading of Plaintiff’s allegations, the complaint does not state a claim under the ADA or the Rehabilitation Act. Plaintiff provides no facts indicating that he is disabled under the ADA, or that Defendant discriminated or retaliated against him and his family or was motivated by any discriminatory animus or ill will, based on a disability. In fact, Plaintiff states that he was asked to leave the hospital solely because he would not wear a mask, but that his son and his son’s mother remained in the emergency room. Furthermore, there are no allegations in the complaint from which the Court can infer that Plaintiff identified himself as a disabled person requiring a reasonable accommodation, and that his request was denied.

Because Plaintiff does not provide any factual allegations suggesting that any defendant discriminated against him based on a disability, Plaintiff fails to state a claim for relief under the ADA or the Rehabilitation Act. See 28 U.S.C § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii).

C. Claim under 21 U.S.C. § 360bbb-3 Plaintiff invokes the Court’s federal question jurisdiction and cites to 21 U.S.C. § 360bbb-3 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (“FDCA”), which sets out the statutory framework for emergency authorization of products by the FDA. See 21 U.S.C. § 360bbb-3. But the FDCA does not create a private right of action to “enforce alleged violations” of the statute.

Arroyo-Bey v. Manhattan North Mgmt. Co. Inc., No. 22-CV-4789 (AT), 2022 WL 2805635 (S.D.N.Y. July 18, 2022); Donohue v. Hochul, No. 21-CV-8463 (JPO), 2022 WL 673636, at *7 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 7, 2022) (citing PDK Labs, Inc. v. Friedlander, 103 F.3d 1105, 1113 (2d Cir. 1997)). Because there is no private right of action to enforce alleged violations of the emergency use authorization itself, as the private right of action to enforce an agency requirement “can extend no further than the personal right conferred by the plain language of the statute,” Taylor ex rel. Wazyluk v. Hous. Auth. of City of New Haven, 645 F.3d 152, 153 (2d Cir. 2011), Plaintiff’s claim under Section 360bbb-3 is dismissed for failure to state a claim on which relief may be granted. See 28 U.S.C § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii).

D. Claims under federal criminal statutes Plaintiff invokes federal criminal statutes under Title 18 of the United States Code. To the extent Plaintiff seeks to enforce criminal laws, that request must be denied. Plaintiff cannot initiate the arrest and prosecution of an individual in this Court because “the decision to prosecute is solely within the discretion of the prosecutor.” Leeke v. Timmerman, 454 U.S. 83, 87 (1981). Nor can Plaintiff direct prosecuting attorneys to initiate a criminal proceeding against Defendant, because prosecutors possess discretionary authority to bring criminal actions, and they are “immune from control or interference by citizen or court.” Conn. Action Now, Inc. v. Roberts Plating Co., 457 F.2d 81, 87 (2d Cir. 1972). Accordingly, the Court dismisses any criminal claims Plaintiff seeks to bring for failure to state a claim. See 28 U.S.C § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii).

E. Claims under state law Plaintiff invokes several municipal regulations banning unlawful discrimination. A district court may decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction of state law claims when it “has dismissed all claims over which it has original jurisdiction.” 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(3). Generally, “when the federal-law claims have dropped out of the lawsuit in its early stages and only state- law claims remain, the federal court should decline the exercise of jurisdiction.” Carnegie- Mellon Univ. v. Cohill, 484 U.S. 343, 350 n.7 (1988).

Because Plaintiff has been granted leave to file an amended complaint, the Court will determine at a later stage whether to exercise its supplemental jurisdiction of any state law claims he may be asserting. See Kolari v. New York-Presbyterian Hosp., 455 F.3d 118, 122 (2d Cir. 2006) (“Subsection (c) of § 1367 ‘confirms the discretionary nature of supplemental jurisdiction by enumerating the circumstances in which district courts can refuse its exercise.’”) quoting City of Chicago v. Int’l Coll. of Surgeons, 522 U.S. 156, 173 (1997))).

F. New York Legal Assistance Group Plaintiff may consider contacting the New York Legal Assistance Group’s (“NYLAG”) Clinic for Pro Se Litigants in the Southern District of New York, which is a free legal clinic staffed by attorneys and paralegals to assist those who are representing themselves in civil lawsuits in this court. The clinic is run by a private organization; it is not part of, or run by, the court. It cannot accept filings on behalf of the court, which must still be made by any pro se party through the Pro Se Intake Unit. A copy of the flyer with details of the clinic is attached to this order.

LEAVE TO AMEND Plaintiff proceeds in this matter without the benefit of an attorney. District courts generally should grant a self-represented plaintiff an opportunity to amend a complaint to cure its defects, unless amendment would be futile. See Hill v. Curcione, 657 F.3d 116, 123-24 (2d Cir. 2011); Salahuddin v. Cuomo, 861 F.2d 40, 42 (2d Cir. 1988). Indeed, the Second Circuit has cautioned that district courts “should not dismiss [a pro se complaint] without granting leave to amend at least once when a liberal reading of the complaint gives any indication that a valid claim might be stated.” Cuoco v. Moritsugu, 222 F.3d 99, 112 (2d Cir. 2000) (quoting Gomez v. USAA Fed. Sav. Bank, 171 F.3d 794, 795 (2d Cir. 1999)). In light of Plaintiff’s pro se status, the Court grants him 60 days’ leave to amend his complaint to detail his claims.

In the “Statement of Claim” section of the amended complaint form, Plaintiff must provide a short and plain statement of the relevant facts supporting each claim against each defendant. If Plaintiff has an address for any named defendant, Plaintiff must provide it. Plaintiff should include all of the information in the amended complaint that Plaintiff wants the Court to consider in deciding whether the amended complaint states a claim for relief. That information should include: a) the names and titles of all relevant people; b) a description of all relevant events, including what each defendant did or failed to do, the approximate date and time of each event, and the general location where each event occurred; c) a description of the injuries Plaintiff suffered; and d) the relief Plaintiff seeks, such as money damages, injunctive relief, or declaratory relief.

Essentially, Plaintiff’s amended complaint should tell the Court: who violated his federally protected rights and how; when and where such violations occurred; and why Plaintiff is entitled to relief.

Because Plaintiff’s amended complaint will completely replace, not supplement, the original complaint, any facts or claims that Plaintiff wants to include from the original complaint must be repeated in the amended complaint.

CONCLUSION Plaintiff is granted leave to file an amended complaint that complies with the standards set forth above. Plaintiff must submit the amended complaint to this Court’s Pro Se Intake Unit within sixty days of the date of this order, caption the document as an “Amended Complaint,” and label the document with docket number 23-CV-3708 (LTS). An Amended Complaint form is attached to this order. No summons will issue at this time. If Plaintiff fails to comply within the time allowed, and he cannot show good cause to excuse such failure, the complaint will be dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.

The Court certifies under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith, and therefore IFP status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. Cf. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962) (holding that an appellant demonstrates good faith when he seeks review of a nonfrivolous issue).

SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 28, 2023 New York, New York /s/ Laura Taylor Swain LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN Chief United States District Judge UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK CV TT (clu ber if has b Write the full name of each plaintiff. ened) nummer troneines seen -against- AMENDED COMPLAINT □□ Do you want a jury trial? [(1Yes (CINo Write the full name of each defendant. If you need more space, please write “see attached” in the space above and attach an additional sheet of paper with the full list of names. The names listed above must be identical to those contained in Section Il.

NOTICE The public can access electronic court files. For privacy and security reasons, papers filed with the court should therefore not contain: an individual’s full social security number or full birth date; the full name of a person known to be a minor; or a complete financial account number. A filing may include only: the last four digits of a social security number; the year of an individual’s birth; a minor’s initials; and the last four digits of a financial account number.

See Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2.

Rev. 2/10/17 I. BASIS FOR JURISDICTION Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction (limited power). Generally, only two types of cases can be heard in federal court: cases involving a federal question and cases involving diversity of citizenship of the parties. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1331, a case arising under the United States Constitution or federal laws or treaties is a federal question case. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1332, a case in which a citizen of one State sues a citizen of another State or nation, and the amount in controversy is more than $75,000, is a diversity case. In a diversity case, no defendant may be a citizen of the same State as any plaintiff.

What is the basis for federal-court jurisdiction in your case? [] Federal Question L] Diversity of Citizenship A. If you checked Federal Question Which of your federal constitutional or federal statutory rights have been violated?

B. If you checked Diversity of Citizenship 1. Citizenship of the parties Of what State is each party a citizen?

The plaintiff , ,is a citizen of the State of (Plaintiffs name) (State in which the person resides and intends to remain.) or, if not lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the United States, a citizen or subject of the foreign state of If more than one plaintiff is named in the complaint, attach additional pages providing information for each additional plaintiff.

Page 2 If the defendant is an individual: The defendant, , is a citizen of the State of (Defendant’s name) or, if not lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the United States, a citizen or subject of the foreign state of .

If the defendant is a corporation: The defendant, , is incorporated under the laws of the State of and has its principal place of business in the State of or is incorporated under the laws of (foreign state) and has its principal place of business in .

If more than one defendant is named in the complaint, attach additional pages providing information for each additional defendant.

II. PARTIES A. Plaintiff Information Provide the following information for each plaintiff named in the complaint. Attach additional pages if needed.

First Name Middle Initial Last Name Street Address County, City State Zip Code Telephone Number Email Address (if available) B. Defendant Information To the best of your ability, provide addresses where each defendant may be served. If the correct information is not provided, it could delay or prevent service of the complaint on the defendant. Make sure that the defendants listed below are the same as those listed in the caption. Attach additional pages if needed.

Defendant 1: First Name Last Name Current Job Title (or other identifying information) Current Work Address (or other address where defendant may be served) County, City State Zip Code Defendant 2: First Name Last Name Current Job Title (or other identifying information) Current Work Address (or other address where defendant may be served) County, City State Zip Code Defendant 3: First Name Last Name Current Job Title (or other identifying information) Current Work Address (or other address where defendant may be served) County, City State Zip Code Defendant 4: First Name Last Name Current Job Title (or other identifying information) Current Work Address (or other address where defendant may be served) County, City State Zip Code III. STATEMENT OF CLAIM Place(s) of occurrence: Date(s) of occurrence: FACTS: State here briefly the FACTS that support your case. Describe what happened, how you were harmed, and what each defendant personally did or failed to do that harmed you. Attach additional pages if needed.

INJURIES: If you were injured as a result of these actions, describe your injuries and what medical treatment, if any, you required and received.

IV. RELIEF State briefly what money damages or other relief you want the court to order.

V. PLAINTIFF’S CERTIFICATION AND WARNINGS By signing below, I certify to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief that: (1) the complaint is not being presented for an improper purpose (such as to harass, cause unnecessary delay, or needlessly increase the cost of litigation); (2) the claims are supported by existing law or by a nonfrivolous argument to change existing law; (3) the factual contentions have evidentiary support or, if specifically so identified, will likely have evidentiary support after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation or discovery; and (4) the complaint otherwise complies with the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11.

I agree to notify the Clerk's Office in writing of any changes to my mailing address. I understand that my failure to keep a current address on file with the Clerk's Office may result in the dismissal of my case.

Each Plaintiff must sign and date the complaint. Attach additional pages if necessary. If seeking to proceed without prepayment of fees, each plaintiff must also submit an IFP application.

Dated Plaintiff's Signature First Name Middle Initial Last Name Street Address County, City State Zip Code Telephone Number Email Address (if available) I have read the Pro Se (Nonprisoner) Consent to Receive Documents Electronically: OlYes If you do consent to receive documents electronically, submit the completed form with your complaint. If you do not consent, please do not attach the form.

Page 7 SD lee Pe ew Since 1990, NYLAG has provided free civil legal services New York ME Legal Assistance Group to New Yorkers who cannot afford private attorneys.

Free Legal Assistance for Self-Represented Civil Litigants in District Court for the Southern District Of New Yor| NYLAG Legal Clinic for Pro Se Litigants in the Southern District of New York is a fre clinic staffed by attorneys, law students and paralegals to assist those who are themselves or planning to represent themselves in civil lawsuits in the outhern District of New York. The clinic does not provide full representation. The clinic, is not part of or run by the court, assists litigants with federal civil cases including involving civil rights, employment discrimination, labor law, social security benefit: and tax.

Contact the Clinic: (212) 659-6190 or complete our online intake form (found here: A staff member will contact you within a few days.

looking for assistance can also contact the clinic at the kiosk located across the hall the pro se clinic office in the courthouse. this time, the clinic offers remote consultations only. Requests for in- appointments will be reviewed on a case-to-case basis. and Hours: Marshall United States Courthouse Room LL22 Foley Square New York, NY 10007 (212) 659 6190 Open weekdays a.m. — 4 p.m.

Closed on federal and court holidays ii □□□□ □

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.