Willis v. New York City Department of Homeless Services

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK RODNEY WILLIS, Plaintiff, -v- CIVIL ACTION NO. 24 Civ. 735 (JGLC) (SLC)

CITY OF NEW YORK, KEVIN PERDOMO, and DENISE ORDER OF SERVICE TURNER,

Defendants. SARAH L. CAVE, United States Magistrate Judge.

On July 15, 2025, Plaintiff Rodney Willis (“Mr. Willis”), who is appearing pro se, filed the Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”), adding Defendants Monique Murray, Patricia Britton, and Cassandra White (the “New Defendants”). (See ECF No. 117). Thereafter, Mr. Willis filed multiple documents supplementing the SAC. (ECF Nos. 119; 120; 124). Mr. Willis also requested that the Court issue an order directing the U.S. Marshals Service (the “U.S. Marshals”) to serve the New Defendants. (ECF Nos. 118; 121; 122). On July 22, 2025, the Court ordered: 1) Plaintiff to re-file the SAC as a single document, and 2) all Defendants to file a letter by Friday, August 1, 2025, advising the Court as to whether they will accept service of the SAC and whether they intend to move to dismiss or answer the SAC. (ECF No. 123). On July 24, 2025, Mr. Willis filed a consolidated SAC. (ECF No. 126). On August 1, 2025, Defendant Denise Turner informed the Court that she accepts service of and intends to answer the SAC (ECF No. 129), but counsel for defendants City of New York and Kevin Perdomo (“City Defendants”) filed a letter informing the Court that the New Defendants must first be served before a determination can be made as to whether the Office of Corporation Counsel will represent them and whether they will move to dismiss or answer the SAC. (ECF No. 131). Because Mr. Willis has been granted permission to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”)

(ECF No. 3), he is entitled to rely on the Court and the U.S. Marshals to effect service of the SAC.1 0F Walker v. Schult, 717 F.3d 119, 123 n.6 (2d Cir. 2013); see also 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d) (“[t]he officers of the court shall issue and serve all process . . . in [IFP] cases”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(3) (instructing that the court “must” order the U.S. Marshals to serve “if the plaintiff is authorized to proceed [IFP]”). The Court respectfully directs the Clerk of Court to complete and process a U.S. Marshals Service Process Receipt and Return form (“USM-285 Form”) for the New Defendants. The Clerk of Court is further directed to issue summonses for the New Defendants, and to deliver to the U.S. Marshals all the paperwork necessary for the U.S. Marshals to effect service of the SAC on them. If the SAC is not served within 90 days after the date the summons is issued, Mr. Willis should request an extension of time for service. See Meilleur v. Strong, 682 F.3d 56, 63

(2d Cir. 2012) (holding that it is plaintiff’s responsibility to request an extension of time for service). Mr. Willis must notify the Court in writing if his address changes, and the Court may dismiss the action if Mr. Willis fails to do so. Mr. Willis is advised of his ability to seek free legal advice from the New York Legal Assistance Group’s legal clinic by visiting its website at nylag.org/pro-se-clinic, or by calling 212-659-6190. This clinic is not part of or run by the Court and it cannot accept filings on behalf of the Court.

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, here, the Court extends the time to serve until 90 days after the date the summons is issued. In sum, the Clerk of Court is respectfully instructed to complete the USM-285 Form with the address for the New Defendants below and to deliver to the U.S. Marshals all documents necessary to effect service of the SAC. The Clerk of Court is further directed to mail a copy of this Order to Mr. Willis. Dated: New York, New York SO ORDERED. August 4, 2025

A eee L. CAVE nited States Magistrate Judge

SERVICE ADDRESS Monique Murray, Patricia Britton, and Cassandra White 260 11th Avenue, 6th floor New York, NY 10001