Judge Pamela Chen
In her pro se action under 42 USC §1983 Augustus alleged that she was defamed by former employer AHRC Nassau, its board of directors, and former supervisor Maynard. Maynard allegedly made “false defamatory written statements” that became part of her personnel file and were used in support of her termination from AHRC Nassau. The court dismissed Augustus’s complaint as frivolous, and for failure to state a claim on which relief could be granted. In concluding that she failed to state a claim under §1983 the court noted that defendants are private parties and not, as necessary for §1983 claims, “persons acting under color of state law.” Further, her defamation claim—a state law claim—is not actionable under §1983 because there had been no constitutional deprivation as required to allege a §1983 claim. The Supreme Court has held that “defamation, by itself, is a tort actionable under the laws of most States,” but not a constitutional deprivation. Further, Augustus’s claims were barred by res judicata, as they arose from the same employment relationship and “common nucleus of operative facts” that formed the basis of her prior 2011 employment discrimination lawsuit, dismissed with prejudice on Oct. 7, 2013.
