Howard v. Annucci

District Court, S.D. New York·Decided August 29, 2023·No. 7:23-cv-06923·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ALFONSO A. HOWARD, Plaintiff, 23-CV-6923 (CS) -against- ORDER OF SERVICE COMMISSIONER ANTHONY ANNUCCI, et al., Defendants. Cathy Seibel, United States District Judge: Plaintiff Alfonso Howard, who is currently incarcerated at Sing Sing Correctional Facility in the custody of the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision (DOCCS), brings this action pro se action. Plaintiff filed an amended complaint (ECF 7) in which he asserts claims arising from the denial of Jumah prayer service on April 14, 2023. By order dated August 28, 2023, the Court granted Plaintiff's request to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP), that is, without prepayment of fees.! DISCUSSION A. Service on Defendants Annucci and Joseph Because Plaintiff has been granted permission to proceed IFP, he is entitled to rely on the Court and the U.S. Marshals Service to effect service.” Walker v. Schult, 717 F.3d. 119, 123 n.6 (2d Cir, 2013); see also 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d) (“The officers of the court shall issue and serve all process... in [IFP] cases.”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(3) (indicating that the court must order the . Marshals Service to serve if the plaintiff is authorized to proceed IFP)).

' Prisoners are not exempt from paying the full filing fee even when they have been granted permission to proceed in forma pauperis. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1). * Although Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure generally requires that a summons be served within 90 days of the date the complaint is filed, Plaintiff is proceeding IFP and could not have effected service until the Court reviewed the complaint and ordered that summonses be issued. The Court therefore extends the time to serve until 90 days after the date summonses are issued.

To allow Plaintiff to effect service on Defendants DOCCS Commissioner Anthony Annucci and Correctional Sergeant Joseph through the U.S, Marshals Service, the Clerk of Court is instructed to fill out a U.S. Marshals Service Process Receipt and Return form (USM-285 form) for these Defendants. The Clerk of Court is further instructed to issue summonses and deliver to the Marshals Service all the paperwork necessary for the Marshals Service to effect service upon these Defendants. If the amended complaint is not served within 90 days after the date the summonses are issued, Plaintiff should request an extension of time for service. See Meilleur v. Strong, 682 F.3d 56, 63 (2d Cir. 2012) (holding that it is the plaintiffs responsibility to request an extension of time for service). Plaintiff must notify the Court in writing if his address changes, and the Court may dismiss the action if Plaintiff fails to do so. B. John Doe Defendants Under Valentin v. Dinkins, a pro se litigant is entitled to assistance from the district court in identifying a defendant. 121 F.3d 72, 76 (2d Cir. 1997). In the amended complaint, Plaintiff may supply sufficient information to permit DOCCS to identify the two John Doe Defendants, It is therefore ordered that the New York State Attorney General, who is the attorney for and agent of DOCCS, must ascertain the identity and badge number of each John Doe whom Plaintiff seeks to sue here and the address where each may be served. The New York State Attorney General must provide this information to Plaintiff and the Court within sixty days of the date of

. this order, Within thirty days of receiving this information, Plaintiff must file a second amended complaint naming the John Doe defendants. The second amended complaint will replace, not supplement, the original complaint. A second amended complaint form that Plaintiff should complete is attached to this order. Once Plaintiff has filed the second amended complaint, the

Court will screen it and, if necessary, issue an order directing the Clerk of Court to complete the USM-285 forms with the addresses for the named John Doe Defendants and deliver to the U.S. Marshals Service all of the documents necessary to effect service. C. Referral to the New York Legal Assistance Group Clinic Plaintiff may consult the legal clinic in this District that assists people who are parties in civil cases and do not have lawyers. The Clinic is run by a private organization called the New York Legal Assistance Group (NYLAG)); it is not part of, or run by, the court (and, among other things, therefore cannot accept filings on behalf of the court, which must still be made by any pro se party through the Pro Se Intake Unit). To receive limited-scope assistance from the Clinic, Plaintiff may mail a signed retainer and intake form to the NYLAG Pro Se Clinic at 40 Foley Square, LL22, NY, NY 10007. Once the paperwork is received, the Clinic will coordinate contact with the litigant, which may take up to two weeks, Copies of the Clinic’s flyer, retainer, and intake form are attached to this order. dD. Request for Pro Bono Counsel Plaintiff requests pro bono counsel. (ECF 3.) The factors to be considered in ruling on an indigent litigant’s request for counsel include the merits of the case, Plaintiffs efforts to obtain a lawyer, and Plaintiff's ability to gather the facts and present the case if unassisted by counsel. See Cooper v_A, Sargenti Co., 877 F.2d 170, 172 (2d Cir. 1989); Hodge y. Police Officers, 802 F.2d 58, 60-62 (2d Cir. 1986). Of these, the merits are “[t{he factor which command|s] the most attention.” Cooper, 877 F.2d at 172. Because it is too early in the proceedings for the Court to assess the merits of the action, Plaintiff's motion for counsel is denied without prejudice to renewal at a later date.

CONCLUSION Plaintiff's request for pro bono counsel (ECF 3) is denied without prejudice. The Clerk of Court is instructed to: (1) issue summonses for DOCCS Commissioner Anthony Annucci and Correctional Sergeant Joseph, complete the USM-285 forms with the addresses for these Defendants, and deliver to the U.S. Marshals Service all documents necessary to effect service: (2) mail a copy of this order and the complaint to the New York State Attorney General at: 28 Liberty Street, 16th Floor, New York, New York 10005; and (3) mail a second amended complaint form and information package to Plaintiff. Plaintiff is referred to the NYLAG Pro Se Clinic. Copies of the Clinic’s flyer, retainer, and intake form are attached to this order. SO ORDERED. Dated: p}r4/23 White Plains, New York (thy dels CATHY SEIBEL United States District Judge

DEFENDANTS AND SERVICE ADDRESSES 1, DOCCS Commissioner Anthony Annucci The Harriman State Campus Albany, New York 12226-2050 2. Correctional Sergeant Joseph Sing Sing Correctional Facility 354 Hunter Street Ossining, New York 10562

N ; A G Since 1990, NYLAG has provided free civil legal services to New Yorkers who cannot afford private attorneys. New York HD Legal Assistance Group Free Legal Assistance for Self-Represented Incarcerated Civil Litigants in Federal District Court

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Howard v. Annucci, (S.D.N.Y. 2023).

Howard v. Annucci (Howard v. Annucci) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Bennie Cooper v. A. Sargenti Co., Inc.
877 F.2d 170 (Second Circuit, 1989)
Meilleur v. Strong
682 F.3d 56 (Second Circuit, 2012)
Walker v. Schult
717 F.3d 119 (Second Circuit, 2013)