Giggetts v. County of Suffolk, 2:19-cv-04885

Plaintiff Ramel Giggetts, a pretrial detainee with schizophrenia, alleges an unprovoked assault by correction officers on Aug. 30, 2018 that caused extensive facial and other injuries requiring surgery.
Immediate medical care was allegedly delayed or downplayed by facility medical staff; later hospitals diagnosed fractures and infections and performed reconstructive surgery.
Dr. Thomas Troiano was one of the jail healthcare providers; the Amended Complaint alleges he regularly denied access to Plaintiff’s psychiatric medication and failed to provide proper post-assault care.
Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint asserting § 1983 claims (Due Process, Equal Protection, failure to intervene, negligent supervision), ADA/RA disability discrimination, state-law negligence, and other claims; Troiano moved to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6).
The court granted Troiano’s motion: dismissed § 1983 claims for lack of Troiano-specific allegations; dismissed ADA/RA claim as not cognizable on these facts; dismissed negligence claim as time-barred per prior scheduling/amendment order.
Plaintiff’s request for leave to amend again was denied without prejudice and referred to Magistrate Judge Steven Tiscione (some amendments deemed futile and thus refused).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of § 1983 claims (Due Process, Equal Protection, negligent supervision, failure to intervene)	Claims alleged against all defendants generally; Troiano was part of medical staff who denied meds and care	Complaint fails Rule 8 notice: no allegation identifying Troiano or particular conduct by him	Dismissed as to Troiano for failure to plead Troiano-specific conduct
ADA / Rehabilitation Act claim	Troiano knew of schizophrenia and denied medication/adequate care, amounting to discrimination by reason of disability	Mere failure or delay in medical treatment (or withholding meds) is not discrimination "by reason of" disability; claim is effectively medical malpractice	Dismissed as not cognizable under ADA/RA (follows Tardif/Wright; no allegation treatment withheld because of disability)
State-law negligence	Plaintiff alleges improper wound care in Aug–Oct 2018 leading to infections	Prior magistrate order permits only negligence claims arising in Apr–May 2019; earlier conduct is time-barred	Dismissed as time-barred against Troiano (claim arises from untimely period)
Leave to amend again	Plaintiff asks leave to amend to add Troiano-specific allegations	Defendant cites undue delay and prior scheduling deadlines; court must consider Rules 15 and 16 factors	Request denied without prejudice as to procedure; some amendments futile (e.g., ADA, negligence) and plaintiff referred to Magistrate Judge to reassert request

Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (pleading standard: legal conclusions insufficient; plausibility required)
Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (pleading must state a plausible claim; famous Twombly standard)
Faber v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co., 648 F.3d 98 (2d Cir. 2011) (courts draw inferences for plaintiff at motion to dismiss stage)
Tardif v. City of New York, 991 F.3d 394 (2d Cir. 2021) (failure to provide timely or adequate custodial medical services does not alone state an ADA/RA claim; must be denial "by reason of" disability)
Wright v. New York State Dep’t of Correctional Services, 831 F.3d 64 (2d Cir. 2016) (elements of ADA/RA claim in correctional context)
McGugan v. Aldana-Bernier, 752 F.3d 224 (2d Cir. 2014) (medical treatment decisions made on medical grounds, even if flawed, are not ADA discrimination without bias evidence)
In re Elevator Antitrust Litigation, 502 F.3d 47 (2d Cir. 2007) (complaints that lump defendants together fail Rule 8 and may be dismissed)
Cuoco v. Moritsugu, 222 F.3d 99 (2d Cir. 2000) (leave to amend futile where substantive defect cannot be cured)
Pasternack v. Shrader, 863 F.3d 163 (2d Cir. 2017) (after scheduling deadline, Rule 16 good-cause/diligence required to amend)