Williams v. The City of New York

District Court, S.D. New York·Decided May 24, 2023·No. 1:23-cv-02936·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK SHAMARK WILLIAMS, Plaintiff, -against- THE CITY OF NEW YORK; POLICE OFFICER 23-CV-02936 (JLR) LUIS A. SEGURA, SHIELD NO. 7904; POLICE ORDER OF SERVICE OFFICER OSVALDO J. GARCIA, TAX #966076; POLICE OFFICERS JOHN DOES # 1- 20, IN THEIR INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICIAL CAPACITIES, Defendants. JENNIFER L. ROCHON, United States District Judge: Plaintiff brings this pro se action under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1988 and the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments, alleging excessive force. Plaintiff sues the City of New York; Police Officer Luis A. Segura, Shield No. 7904; Police Officer Osvaldo J. Garcia, Tax # 966076; and 20 John Doe police officers. By order dated April 10, 2023, the Court granted Plaintiff’s request to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”), that is, without prepayment of fees. ECF No. 4. DISCUSSION A. Service on the City of New York, Police Officer Luis A. Segura, Shield No. 7904; and Police Officer Osvaldo J. Garcia, Tax # 966076 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.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

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 served the summons and the complaint 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. 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 the following Defendants through the U.S. Marshals Service – the City of New York; Police Officer Luis A. Segura, Shield No. 7904; and

Police Officer Osvaldo J. Garcia, Tax # 966076 – 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 Defendants. If the 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 plaintiff’s 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 complaint, Plaintiff supplies sufficient information to permit the New York City Police Department (“NYPD”) to identify the police officers involved in the alleged deprivation of Plaintiff’s rights on August 27, 2020. It is therefore ordered that the New York City Law Department, which is the attorney for and agent of the NYPD, must ascertain the identity and badge number of each John Doe whom Plaintiff seeks to sue here and the address where these defendants may be served. The New York City Law 2 Department 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 an amended complaint naming the John Doe defendants. The amended complaint will replace, not supplement, the

original complaint. An amended complaint form that Plaintiff should complete is attached to this order. Once Plaintiff has filed an amended complaint, the Court will screen the amended complaint 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 all documents necessary to effect service to the U.S. Marshals Service. C. Referral to the New York Legal Assistance Group Plaintiff may consider contacting the New York Legal Assistance Group’s (“NYLAG”) Clinic for Pro Se Litigants in the Southern District of New York, which is a free legal clinic staffed by attorneys and paralegals to assist those who are representing themselves in civil lawsuits in this court. The clinic is run by a private organization; it is not part of, or run by, the court. It cannot accept filings on behalf of the court, which must still be made by any pro se

party through the Pro Se Intake Unit. A copy of the flyer with details of the clinic is attached to this order. CONCLUSION The Clerk of Court is instructed to issue summonses for the City of New York; Police Officer Luis A. Segura, Shield No. 7904; and Police Officer Osvaldo J. Garcia, Tax # 966076, complete the USM-285 forms with the addresses for these Defendants, and deliver all documents necessary to effect service to the U.S. Marshals Service.

3 The Clerk of Court is further directed to mail a copy of this order and the complaint to the New York City Law Department at: 100 Church Street, New York, New York 10007. Plaintiff is referred to the NYLAG Pro Se Clinic. Copies of the Clinic’s flyer 1s attached to this order. The Clerk of Court is directed to mail an information package to Plaintiff. Dated: May 24, 2023 SO ORDERED. New York, New York —§$ ec hts; — United States District Judge

DEFENDANTS AND SERVICE ADDRESSES The City of New York City New York City Law Department 100 Church Street New York, NY 10007 Police Officer Luis A. Segura, Shield No. 7904 New York City Police Department, 33rd Precinct 2207 Amsterdam Avenue New York, New York 10032 Police Officer Osvaldo J. Garcia, Tax # 966076 New York City Police Department, 33rd Precinct 2207 Amsterdam Avenue New York, New York 10032 = = eee 14 ESE ° . New York ME Legal Assistance Group District of New York

The NYLAG Legal Clinic for Pro Se Litigants in the Southern District of New York provides free limited legal assistance to individuals who are representing themselves or planning to represent themselves in civil lawsuits in federal court in Manhattan and White Plains. The clinic is staffed by attorneys, law students, and paralegals. Information given to clinic staff is confidential.

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

Williams v. The City of New York, (S.D.N.Y. 2023).

Williams v. The City of New York (Williams v. The City 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)