Kotler v. Torres

── Kotler v. Torres ── Case No.: 24-879 Court: Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit Date: March 18, 2026 Category: General 24-879 Kotler v. Torres UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT SUMMARY ORDER RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2007, IS PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS COURT’S LOCAL RULE 32.1.1. WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE FEDERAL APPENDIX OR AN ELECTRONIC DATABASE (WITH THE NOTATION “SUMMARY ORDER”). A PARTY CITING A SUMMARY ORDER MUST SERVE A COPY OF IT ON ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL. At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of New York, on the 18th day of March, two thousand twenty-six. Present: JOHN M. WALKER, JR., ROBERT D. SACK, EUNICE C. LEE, Circuit Judges. _____________________________________ KERRY KOTLER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. No. 24-879-pr PEDRO TORRES, DAISY RODRIGUEZ, JOHN DOE #1, JOHN DOE #2, Defendants-Appellees, CINDY MORRO, Defendant. _____________________________________ For Plaintiff-Appellant: DANIEL R. LAMBRIGHT (Christopher T. Dunn, Molly K. Biklen, on the brief), New York Civil Liberties Union Foundation, New York, NY. For Defendants-Appellees: BLAIR J. GREENWALD, Assistant Solicitor General, (Ester Murdukhayeva, Deputy Solicitor General, Barbara D. Underwood, Solicitor General, on the brief), for Letitia James, Attorney General for the State of New York, New York, NY. Appeal from a March 5, 2024 judgment of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Donnelly, J.). UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED in part and VACATED and REMANDED in part. Kerry Kotler appeals from the district court’s order dismissing his suit against Pedro Torres and Daisy Rodriguez (collectively, “Appellees”), parole officers of the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision (“DOCCS”), alleging violations of his due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 1 Specifically, Kotler claims a violation of his due process rights based on the delay in approval of his housing for release from prison and from a denial of a fair hearing at his parole revocation proceeding. 1 Kotler also named as defendants two unnamed employees of DOCCS and the New York State Office of Mental Health (“the Doe defendants”) and Cindy Morro, the administ