"Sewer service is an ignominious practice carried out by vicious process servers who file fraudulent affidavits of service in order to obtain default judgments or the eviction of tenants." Morris v. New York City, No. 14-CV-1749, 2014 WL 3897585, at *1 n.1 (E.D.N.Y. Aug. 8, 2014) (internal quotation marks omitted) (quoting Velazquez v. Thompson, 451 F.2d 202, 204 (2d Cir. 1971)). II. Discussion
See, e.g., Bloom v. Town of New Windsor Police Dep't, 234 F.3d 1261, 1261 (2d Cir. 2000); Ginsberg v. Healey Car & Truck Leasing, Inc., 189 F.3d 268, 272 (2d Cir. 1999); Fiore v. Rivera, No. 14-CV-3570, 2015 WL 5007938, at *4 (E.D.N.Y. Aug. 20, 2015); Posr v. City of N.Y., No. 15-CV-584, 2015 WL 1569179, at *2-3 (E.D.N.Y. Apr. 4, 2015); Bender v. City of N.Y., No. 09-CV-3286, 2011 WL 4344203, at *14 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 14, 2011). A private citizen can be liable under § 1983 if she conspires with State actors, see, e.g., Gierlinger v. Town of Brant, No. 13-CV-370, 2015 WL 269131, at *4 (W.D.N.Y. Jan. 21, 2015), but Plaintiff here does not allege, let alone provide facts plausibly suggesting, that any conspiracy existed here, see Morris v. New York City, No. 14-CV-1749, 2014 WL 3897585, at *2 (E.D.N.Y. Aug. 8, 2014). Accordingly, Plaintiff's abuse of process claim is dismissed.
Thus the "extensive emails" fail to "nudge[ Plaintiff's] claims across the line from conceivable to plausible." Twombly, 550 U.S. at 570; see Morris v. N.Y. City, No. 14-CV-1749, 2014 WL 3897585, at *2 (E.D.N.Y. Aug. 8, 2014) (inference of conspiracy not warranted where police spoke to private individuals and relied on their information in making arrest); Stewart v. Victoria's Secret Stores, LLC, 851 F. Supp. 2d 442, 446 (E.D.N.Y. 2012) (providing information to police, even if false, does not suggest conspiracy unless private party improperly influenced or controlled police). C. State Law Claims
A duly licensed state process server cannot be held liable for lawfully serving process. While a process server may be liable for attesting to falsely serving process, see, e.g., Morris v. New York City, 2014 WL 3897585, at *1 (E.D.N.Y. Aug. 8, 2014), here, plaintiff does not allege Eakley attested to service never performed.
Ms. Woge is a reporter for The Plain Dealer. These people were simply doing their respective jobs, and Plaintiff's conclusory allegations neither establish a conspiracy nor even suggest a conspiratorial motive"); see also Morris v. New York City, No. 14–cv–1749, 2014 WL 3897585, at *2 (E.D.N.Y. Aug. 8, 2014) ("[I]t is a normal part of police work for officers to speak with and question complaining witnesses....").Second, while there can be no doubt that Boutwell wanted Rooster's closed and that Dunlap knew of this desire, "a private party's motivation is irrelevant to the determination of whether that private party acted under color of state law."