Opinion
22 CV 4014 (VB)
11-21-2022
TERRELL K. BROCK, Plaintiff, v. CVS CORPORATION; LEONARDO CORONADO; ASHLEY CAMACHO; CITY OF WHITE PLAINS; JOSE LUIS FORMOSO; and P.O. C. BROWNING, Defendants.
ORDER
Vincent L. Briccetti United States District Judge
Plaintiff, who is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, commenced this action by filing a complaint. (Doc. #2). In his second amended complaint, he asserts claims against six defendants. (Doc. #17).
By Order dated November 2, 2022 (Doc. #34), the Court set out the procedural history of this case, and ordered: (i) the White Plains Law Department to comply with the Court's Order dated May 20, 2022, by identifying the officers who arrested plaintiff on April 3, 2020, and April 13, 2020, pursuant to Valentin v. Dinkens, 121 F.3d 72, 76 (2d Cir. 1997), by November 16, 2022; (ii) an extension of plaintiff's deadline to serve Officer Formoso, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(m), to January 17, 2023; and (iii) the time for all defendants to answer, move or otherwise respond to the second amended complaint is STAYED pending further Court Order.
On November 17, 2022, the Court received a letter dated November 16, 2022, from the White Plains Law Department (Doc. #36), and two attached police records regarding the arrests of plaintiff on April 3, 2020, and April 13, 2020. The letter states “this office attaches the police records from both incidents.” (Id.) However, to date, the White Plains Law Department has not electronically filed the two police record attachments referenced, which were included in its mailing to the Court. The White Plains Law Department also did not file an affidavit of service or indicate whether it provided these materials to plaintiff, as required by the Court's November 2, 2022, Order.
In the letter, the White Plains Law Department identified police officers Beall, Browning, and Schneider as being involved in plaintiff's April 3, 2020, arrest. The White Plains Law Department also identified Officer Vanderwalker as being involved in plaintiff's April 13, 2020, arrest.
Further, the White Plains Law Department stated, “the records from these arrests do not reveal any involvement of Police Officer Formoso.” However, the White Plains Law Department does not offer any other information regarding whether Officer Formoso was involved in the events described in the second amended complaint. The White Plains Law Department also does not indicate whether Officer Formoso is currently employed by the White Plains Police Department.
On November 18, 2022, defendants CVS Albany, LLC (sued as CVS Corporation), Leonardo Coronado, and Ashley Camacho (together, the “CVS defendants”) filed an answer to the second amended complaint and a cross-claim against the City of White Plains, White Plains Police Officer Formoso, and John Doe White Plains Officer. (Doc. #35). The CVS defendants did not comply with the Court's November 2, 2022, Order, which directed that the time for all defendants to answer, move, or otherwise respond to the second amended complaint was STAYED pending further Court Order.
Further, the CVS defendants improperly filed numerous discovery documents-including a demand for interrogatories, notice of discovery and inspection, demand for expert witness information, demand for medical information, demand for insurance information, demand for collateral source information, notice declining service via facsimile, notice to take deposition upon oral examination, demand for proof of service, demand for ad damnum, demand for attorney identification, and demand for Medicare/Medicaid information-on the docket. (Doc. #35). The parties shall not file discovery documents unless in connection with a motion or application. See Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 5(d)(1); Local Civil Rule 5.1. The Court also notes that several of these documents invoke the New York Civil Practice Law and Rules, which do not apply in this federal action. This case is governed by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED:
1. The White Plains Law Department shall comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the SDNY Local Rules, and Judge Briccetti's Individual Practices for all further filings.
2. By December 5,2022, the White Plains Law Department shall: (i) file a formal notice of appearance on the docket; (ii) provide plaintiff and the Court, in writing, with an address at which Officers Beall, Formoso, Schneider, and Vanderwalker can be served-or alternatively, indicate whether it will accept service on their behalf; (iii) refile the letter dated November 16, 2022, as well as the attachments thereto, on the ECF docket; and (iv) serve a copy of the letter and attachments on plaintiff at the address listed on the docket, and file proof of service.
3. By December 21, 2022, plaintiff shall file a third amended complaint listing the full names of all defendants, including White Plains Police Officers Beall, Schneider, and Vanderwalker, who were newly identified by the White Plains Law Department. Plaintiff shall utilize the third amended complaint form attached to this Order. The third amended complaint will completely replace, not merely supplement, the existing second amended complaint. Therefore, plaintiff must include in the third amended complaint all information necessary for his claims.
4. Once plaintiff has filed the third amended complaint, the Court will screen the third amended complaint and issue an appropriate order directing the Clerk of Court to issue summonses for the newly identified defendants.
5. Plaintiff's deadline pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(m) to service Officer Formoso is STAYED pending further Court Order.
6. The time for all parties to answer, move, or otherwise respond to the second amended complaint and any cross-claims is STAYED pending further Court Order. To be clear, the parties shall not answer, move, or otherwise respond to plaintiff's second amended complaint or to the CVS defendants' cross-claims, pending further Court Order.
7. The parties shall not file discovery documents unless in connection with a motion or application. See Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 5(d)(1); Local Civil Rule 5.1.
The Court certifies under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith, and therefore in forma pauperis status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. Cf. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962).
Chambers will mail a copy of this Order to plaintiff at the address listed on the docket, and to the City of White Plains Law Department at 255 Main Street, White Plains, New York 10601.
SO ORDERED