Opinion
1:21-cv-09599-MKV
05-17-2022
MICHAEL E. MEGGINSON, Plaintiff, v. CHIEF OF DEPARTMENT STUKES, CHIEF GLOVER, CITY OF NEW YORK, Defendants.
VALENTIN ORDER
MARY KAY VYSKOCIL, United States District Judge.
Plaintiff Michael Megginson, proceeding pro se, initiated this action by filing a Complaint on November 18, 2021. [ECF No. 1]. Plaintiff named defendants “Chief of Department Stukes, ” “Chief Glover, ” and the New York City Department of Corrections as defendants. [ECF No. 1]. The Court thereafter filed an order construing the Complaint as asserting claims against the City of New York instead of the New York City Department of Corrections and requesting that Defendants City of New York, Chief Stukes, and Chief Glover waive service of summons. [ECF No. 7].
In response, three waivers of service were filed on March 11, 2022, two executed and one unexecuted. [ECF Nos. 9-11]. Specifically, the City of New York and Chief Stukes agreed to waive service of summons and complaint. [ECF Nos. 9, 11]. However, the New York City Department of Correction (“DOC) declined on behalf of Chief Glover to waive service of the summons and complaint because, as the New York City Department of Correction represents, no employee in the agency matches that name and title. [ECF No. 10].
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 DOC to identify “Chief Glover, ” whom Plaintiff identified as the “Chief of OSIU” at Rikers island between October 21, 2021 and October 31, 2021.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the New York City Law Department, which is the attorney for and agent of the DOC, is directed to ascertain the identity of the individual whom Plaintiff seeks to sue here and the address where the defendant may be served. The New York City Law Department must provide this information to Plaintiff and the Court within thirty days of the date of this order.
If the defendant is a current or former DOC employee or official, the Law Department should note in the response to this order that an electronic request for a waiver of service can be made under the e-service agreement for cases involving DOC defendants, rather than by personal service at a DOC facility. If the defendant is not a current or former DOC employee or official, but otherwise works or worked at a DOC facility, the Law Department must provide a residential address where the individual may be served.
Within thirty days of receiving this information, Plaintiff must file an amended complaint naming the proper defendant(s). 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 asking Defendants to waive service.
The request of the City of New York for a pre-motion conference in anticipation of filing a motion to dismiss [ECF No. 13] is DENIED without prejudice.
The Clerk of Court is respectfully requested to mail a copy of this Order to the pro se Plaintiff at the address of record.
SO ORDERED.