Jabbar v. Fischer
2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 12747
| 2d Cir. | 2012Background
- Jabbar, a state inmate, sues NY prison officials alleging Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment violations from transporting him on a bus without seatbelts.
- District court dismissed the complaint under Rule 12(b)(6).
- April 24, 2009, Jabbar was transported on an Ulster hub bus without inmate seatbelts, while shackled; he slept, the bus turned forcefully, and he was thrown from his seat, injuring his head and back.
- Jabbar alleged defendants knew the bus lacked seatbelts and had authority to order belt-equipped buses but failed to provide them.
- The court held failure to provide seatbelts, without more, does not violate the Eighth or Fourteenth Amendments; affirmed dismissal.
- The opinion discusses related case law and distinguishes reliance on negligence from deliberate indifference and due process violations.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does failure to provide seatbelts alone violate the Eighth Amendment | Jabbar argues lack of seatbelts on transport facilitates cruel conditions. | Defendants contend absence of seatbelts is not a constitutionally cognizable deprivation. | No, not by itself. |
| Is there a Fourteenth Amendment due process violation | Jabbar claims deprivation of life or safety due to policy. | No deliberate deprivation shown; no life, liberty, or property deprivation. | No due process violation on these facts. |
| Is there Eighth Amendment objective or subjective basis given context | Seatbelt absence creates risk to safety. | Policy based on penological concerns; not inherently cruel or unusual. | Not satisfied under either objective or subjective prong. |
| Did the complaint plausibly allege deliberate indifference or intent to punish | Complaint showed negligence and supervision failure. | No evidence of intent to punish; no known excessive risk. | Dismissal proper for lack of plausible allegations. |
Key Cases Cited
- Gaston v. Coughlin, 249 F.3d 156 (2d Cir. 2001) (Eighth Amendment requires humane conditions; not necessarily comfortable)
- Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825 (Supreme Court 1994) (deliberate indifference standard)
- Rhodes v. Chapman, 452 U.S. 337 (Supreme Court 1981) (reasonableness of prison conditions in context)
- Blissett v. Coughlin, 66 F.3d 531 (2d Cir. 1995) (evaluates standards for Eighth Amendment deprivation)
- Phelps v. Kapnolas, 308 F.3d 180 (2d Cir. 2002) (basic human needs and safety considerations for prisoners)
- Helling v. McKinney, 509 U.S. 25 (Supreme Court 1993) (risk and exposure to harm in constitutional analysis)
- Daniels v. Williams, 474 U.S. 327 (Supreme Court 1986) (due process requires deprivation of life, liberty, or property; negligence insufficient)
- Spencer v. Knapheide Truck Equip. Co., 183 F.3d 902 (8th Cir. 1999) (precludes Eighth Amendment claim absent punitive or excessive risk; policy context)
- Carrasquillo v. City of New York, 324 F. Supp. 2d 428 (S.D.N.Y. 2004) (district court rejection of seatbelt-based constitutional claims)