MacNeal v. The State of New York

District Court, S.D. New York·Decided December 4, 2024·No. 1:24-cv-06017·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK KELLY MACNEAL, Plaintiff, 1:24-CV-6017 (LGS) -against- ORDER OF SERVICE THE STAE OF NEW YORK, et al., Defendants. LORNA G. SCHOFIELD, United States District Judge: Plaintiff Kelly MacNeal, who is appearing pro se, brings this action against (1) the State of New York; (2) the City of New York; (3) employees of the New York State Division of Human Rights (“DHR”) Chelsea John, Elena Perlongo, Gina Martinez, Candace Tyndall and John Herrion; (4) employees of the New York City Police Department (“NYPD”) John Corde, Grey Castro, Christian Orellana and Jose Quintuna-Guaman; and (5) Emergency Medical Technicians of the New York City Fire Department (“FDNY”) Frank Tarsillo and Ryan Stack (collectively, “Defendants”). On November 29, 2024, Plaintiff filed her Amended Complaint. By order dated August 14, 2024, the court granted Plaintiff’s request to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”), that is, without prepayment of fees. Because Plaintiff has been granted permission to proceed IFP, she is entitled to rely on assistance from the Court and the United States Marshals Service (“USMS”) to effect service.1 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

1Although 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 any summonses be issued. The Court therefore extends the time to serve until 90 days after the date that any summonses issue. 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). To allow Plaintiff to effect service on Defendants through the USMS, the Clerk of Court is instructed to fill out USMS Process Receipt and Return forms (“USM-285 forms”) for all defendants. The Clerk of Court is further instructed to issue summonses for all Defendants, and deliver to the USMS all the paperwork necessary for the USMS to effect service upon them. If the Amended Complaint is not served on Defendants within 90 days after the date that summonses for those defendants have 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 plaintiff’s responsibility to request an extension of time for service). Plaintiff must notify the Court in writing if her address changes, and the Court may dismiss the action if Plaintiff fails to do so.

SO ORDERED. Dated: December 4, 2024 . New York, New York LORNA G. SCHOFIEL UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

SERVICE ADDRESSES

1. The State of New York Office of the New York State Attorney General 28 Liberty Street New York, New York 10005 2. The City of New York Law Department 100 Church Street New York, New York 10007 3. Chelsea John New York State Division of Human Rights One Fordham Plaza, 4th Floor Bronx, New York 10458 4. Elena Perlongo New York State Division of Human Rights One Fordham Plaza, 4th Floor Bronx, New York 10458 5. Gina Martinez New York State Division of Human Rights One Fordham Plaza, 4th Floor Bronx, New York 10458 6. Candace Tyndall New York State Division of Human Rights One Fordham Plaza, 4th Floor Bronx, New York 10458 7. John Herrion New York State Division of Human Rights One Fordham Plaza, 4th Floor Bronx, New York 10458 8. John Corde (Shield No. 26994) New York City Police Department, 10th Precinct 230 W 20th St New York, New York, 10011 9. Christian Orellana (Shield No. 15363) New York City Police Department, 10th Precinct 230 W 20th St New York, New York, 10011 10. Jose Quintuna-Guaman (Shield No. 7157) New York City Police Department, 10th Precinct 230 W 20th St New York, New York, 10011 11. Frank Tarsillo Fire Department of the City of New York 9 Metro Tech Center Brooklyn, New York 11201 12. Ryan Stack New York City Law Department 100 Church Street New York, New York 10007

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

MacNeal v. The State of New York, (S.D.N.Y. 2024).

MacNeal v. The State of New York (MacNeal v. The State of New York) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Meilleur v. Strong
682 F.3d 56 (Second Circuit, 2012)
Walker v. Schult
717 F.3d 119 (Second Circuit, 2013)