From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Smith v. Homeless

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Mar 10, 2021
20-CV-10710 (VSB) (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 10, 2021)

Opinion

20-CV-10710 (VSB)

03-10-2021

RICHARD SMITH, Plaintiff, v. HOMES FOR THE HOMELESS, Defendant.


ORDER OF SERVICE :

Plaintiff brings this pro se action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ("Title VII"), 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17, alleging that his employer discriminated against him based on his race. The Court also construes the amended complaint as asserting claims under the New York State and City Human Rights Laws. By order dated December 28, 2020, the Court granted Plaintiff's request to proceed in forma pauperis ("IFP").

By order dated January 7, 2021, Judge Louis L. Stanton granted Plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint. (ECF 4). On March 8, 2021, Plaintiff filed an amended complaint. The amended complaint (ECF 6) is the operative pleading.

DISCUSSION

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. 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)). Although Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure generally requires that the summons and complaint be served within 90 days of the date the complaint is filed, Plaintiff is proceeding IFP and could not have served the summons and amended complaint until the Court reviewed the complaint and ordered that a summons be issued. The Court therefore extends the time to serve until 90 days after the date the summons is issued. If the amended complaint is not served within that time, 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); see also Murray v. Pataki, 378 F. App'x 50, 52 (2d Cir. 2010) ("As long as the [plaintiff proceeding IFP] provides the information necessary to identify the defendant, the Marshals' failure to effect service automatically constitutes 'good cause' for an extension of time within the meaning of Rule 4(m).").

To allow Plaintiff to effect service on Defendant Homes for the Homeless 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 this defendant. 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 this defendant.

Plaintiff must notify the Court in writing if his address changes, and the Court may dismiss the action if Plaintiff fails to do so.

CONCLUSION

The Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of this order to Plaintiff, together with an information package.

The Clerk of Court is further instructed to complete the USM-285 form with the address for Defendant Homes for the Homeless and deliver to the U.S. Marshals Service all documents necessary to effect service on this defendant.

In light of the current global health crisis, parties proceeding pro se are encouraged to submit all filings by email to Temporary_Pro_Se_Filing@nysd.uscourts.gov. Pro se parties also are encouraged to consent to receive all court documents electronically. A consent to electronic service form is available on the Court's website. Pro se parties who are unable to use email may submit documents by regular mail or in person at the drop box located at the U.S. Courthouses in Manhattan (500 Pearl Street) and White Plains (300 Quarropas Street). For more information, including instructions on this new email service for pro se parties, please visit the Court's website at nysd.uscourts.gov. SO ORDERED. Dated: March 10, 2021

New York, New York

/s/_________

VERNON S. BRODERICK

United States District Judge

DEFENDANT AND SERVICE ADDRESS

Homes for the Homeless

36 Cooper Square

New York, NY 10003


Summaries of

Smith v. Homeless

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Mar 10, 2021
20-CV-10710 (VSB) (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 10, 2021)
Case details for

Smith v. Homeless

Case Details

Full title:RICHARD SMITH, Plaintiff, v. HOMES FOR THE HOMELESS, Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

Date published: Mar 10, 2021

Citations

20-CV-10710 (VSB) (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 10, 2021)