Schmiege v. The State of N.Y.

2 Citing cases

  1. Mazyck v. Doe

    6:20-CV-06055 EAW (W.D.N.Y. Mar. 4, 2024)

    This is true even when the comments are made publicly and with potentially nefarious intent. See, e.g., Morales v. Mackalm, 278 F.3d 126, 131 (2d Cir. 2002) (referring to plaintiff as a “stoolie,” apparently labeling him as an informant to the other prisoners, insufficient to support First Amendment retaliation claim), abrogated on other grounds by Porter v. Nussle, 534 U.S. 516, 532 (2002); Zielinski v. Annucci, 547 F.Supp.3d 227, 233 (N.D.N.Y. 2021) (calling plaintiff a “rat” in front of other prisoners insufficient); Smith v. Annucci, No. 9:17-cv-00558 (AMN/TWD), 2023 WL 3853655, at *17 (N.D.N.Y. Feb. 28, 2023) (telling another prisoner that plaintiff was a sex offender, apparently with the intent to cause a fight between plaintiff and the other prisoner, insufficient); Schmiege v. New York, No. 21-CV-418-LJV, 2022 WL 16922123, at *12 (W.D.N.Y. Nov. 14, 2022) (“Schmiege's conclusory allegation that security staff made ‘dehumanizing comments' about him and called him a ‘[r] at snitch' does not raise a viable retaliation claim.” (alteration in original)); Williams v. Muller, No. 98 CIV. 5204(BSJ), 2001 WL 936297 at *3-4 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 17, 2001)

  2. Leftridge v. Connecticut Judicial Branch

    3:22-cv-411 (JAM) (D. Conn. Jun. 30, 2023)   Cited 4 times

    As for Title II, which forbids discrimination by public services, programs, and activities, see id. § 12132, the extent to which Congress has abrogated the states' sovereign immunity remains unclear after the Supreme Court's decision in United States v. Georgia, 546 U.S. 151 (2006), which held that “insofar as Title II creates a private cause of action for damages against the States for conduct that actually violates the Fourteenth Amendment, Title II validly abrogates state sovereign immunity.” Id. at 159. See Schmiege v. New York, 2022 WL 16922123, at *3 n.6 (W.D.N.Y. 2022) (“Since Georgia, courts in this Circuit have taken different approaches when faced with the question of whether Congress has validly abrogated sovereign immunity under Title II.”)