Court Allows Limited FDNY EMS Claim to Proceed After Earlier Dismissal in Involuntary Transport Case

A federal magistrate in New York has issued a new ruling in MacNeal v. New York, a case involving an alleged involuntary mental-health transport by NYPD officers and FDNY EMS personnel. The decision follows an earlier dismissal of claims against the City and FDNY that we covered last year. However, the court granted plaintiff leave to amend her complaint and replead certain claims. 

The plaintiff, proceeding pro se, alleged that city and state actors violated her rights after she complained to housing and civil-rights agencies about conditions in her apartment building. According to the pleadings, the plaintiff has a documented physical disability stemming from a traumatic brain injury and mobility issues, and she attributed health problems to cigarette smoke and chemical fumes in her building.

In 2023, after a dispute with the New York City Commission on Human Rights (CCHR), the plaintiff sent an email stating, in part, “I am going to kill myself if this doesn’t stop.” NYPD officers and FDNY EMS responded, detained her, and transported her to a hospital for a psychiatric evaluation. She was released the following day after being found not suicidal.

In February 2025, the district court dismissed claims against the City of New York and FDNY, finding that the original complaint failed to state legally sufficient claims arising from the involuntary transport. We discussed that dismissal in detail in an earlier Fire Law Blog post.

After the dismissal, the plaintiff was granted leave to file an amended complaint. The amended pleading again named the City of New York and individual NYPD officers, along with two FDNY EMS members, alleging unlawful imprisonment, unlawful search, retaliation, and disability discrimination under federal and state law.

With respect to the EMS response, the plaintiff alleged that FDNY EMS personnel arrived after NYPD officers requested medical assistance. She claimed that she repeatedly told both police and EMS personnel that she was not suicidal and did not require hospitalization. According to the amended complaint, she ultimately agreed to be transported by ambulance because she feared being forcibly restrained if she refused.

The City defendants filed a motion to dismiss, leading to Magistrate Judge Jennifer E. Willis’ recommendations. As to the individual FDNY EMS defendants, the Judge Willis noted that the amended complaint did not allege specific actions taken by either EMS member beyond their presence at the scene and their participation in the transport. Because the complaint lacked individualized factual allegations, the court recommended dismissal of the claims against the EMS personnel in their individual capacities. 

However, the court reached a different conclusion with respect to one claim against the City itself. The court recommended that the City’s motion to dismiss be denied as to the plaintiff’s §1983 claim for unlawful imprisonment. That claim is based on the allegation that the plaintiff was detained and transported for a mental-health evaluation without sufficient justification, pursuant to what she alleged was City policy or protocol under a Monell theory. One of the individual police officers also remains in the suit.

All other claims against the City, including claims of unlawful search, retaliation, and disability discrimination, were recommended for dismissal.

The case now returns to the district judge for a final ruling on the Report and Recommendation.