In re McDaniel Litigation

District Court, S.D. New York·Decided December 16, 2021·No. 1:19-cv-07680·Unknown

Opinion

USDC SDNY DOCUMENT UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT ELECTRONICALLY FILED SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK DOC #: CURTIS McDANIEL, DATE FILED:_ 12/16/2021 Plaintiff, -against-

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, et al, 1:19-CV-7680 (AJN) (KHP) Defendants. ORDER

CURTIS McDANIEL, Plaintiff, -against-

NYC FIRE DEPARTMENT, NYC POLICE DEPARTMENT, JOHN and JANE DOES 1-7, CITY OF NEW YORK, Defendants.

KATHARINE H. PARKER, United States Magistrate Judge: Pursuant to a case management conference today, the Court was informed that service of Plaintiff's Fourth Amended Complaint has not yet been executed on Defendant Rosanna Espinal or Defendant Judy Biondolillo. While the Court acknowledges that its previous order provided the U.S. Marshal’s with a 90-day deadline from October 15, 2021, the Court respectfully requests that the U.S. Marshal’s serve these Defendants before December 31, 2021 if at all possible because all other defendants have been served. The following addresses were provided for purposes of service of process:

Police Officer Rosanna Espinal, Shield No. 23019 New York City Police Department 23rd Precinct 162 East 102nd Street New York, NY 10029 Sergeant Judy Biondolillo, Shield No. 3229 New York City Police Department Housing Bureau P.S.A. #5 221 East 123rd Street New York, NY 10035 Because Plaintiff has been granted permission to proceed in forma pauperis (“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) (the Court must order the Marshals Service to serve if the plaintiff is authorized to proceed IFP). Accordingly, the Clerk of Court is respectfully requested to issue a summons as to the above-listed Defendants, and the Marshalls are directed to serve the Fourth Amended Complaint on the above-listed by December 31, 2021. CONCLUSION To allow Plaintiff to effect service on all Defendants 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 each of the Defendants for whom an address was provided above. The Clerk of Court is further instructed to issue a summons and deliver to the Marshals Service all the paperwork necessary for the Marshals Service to effect service upon these Defendants. The Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of this order to Plaintiff. SO ORDERED. Dated: December 16, 2021 New York, New York og igs Kat hawt H f alk KATHARINE H. PARKER United States Magistrate Judge

The Clerk of Court is requested to mail a copy of this order to: Curtis McDaniel DIN # 20-A-0242 Bare Hill Correctional Facility Caller Box 20 181 Brand Road Malone, NY 12953

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

In re McDaniel Litigation, (S.D.N.Y. 2021).

In re McDaniel Litigation (In re McDaniel Litigation) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Walker v. Schult
717 F.3d 119 (Second Circuit, 2013)