Francis v. City of New York
- Garnett
- 1:24-cv-02530
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Francis v. City of New York, Judge Garnett ordered service steps in Hopeton Francis’s medical-care lawsuit and sought identifying information for C.O. Garcia.
Hopeton Francis, Colette Raspanti, C.O. Garcia, the U.S. Marshals Service, the Clerk of Court, and the New York City Law Department.
What happened
Hopeton Francis, who is incarcerated and representing himself, sued the City of New York and others under a federal civil-rights law, alleging inadequate medical care. The court had already allowed him to proceed without paying filing fees in advance.
The court ordered the Clerk to prepare service materials for Colette Raspanti, identified in the complaint as “Nurse Collette,” and send them to the U.S. Marshals Service. Francis must provide more information within 30 days to help identify C.O. Garcia; the New York City Law Department then has 30 days to try to identify Garcia.
Judge Margaret M. Garnett’s order addressed service of the lawsuit, not whether Francis’s medical-care allegations are valid. The court directed the Clerk to update the docket, issue the summons for Raspanti, provide the Marshals Service with the necessary documents, and mail the order and complaint to the New York City Law Department.
The detailed version
- Francis v. City of New York · No. 1:24-cv-02530
- Garnett
- June 20, 2024
Background
Hopeton Francis, who is incarcerated at the Eric M. Taylor Center on Rikers Island, filed this action without a lawyer under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that he was denied adequate medical care. The court had previously allowed him to proceed without prepaying filing fees. Because Francis was allowed to proceed without prepayment, the court explained that he could rely on the court and the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the defendants.
The court had asked the defendants to waive service of the summons. The New York City Department of Correction declined to waive service for C.O. Garcia because the complaint did not contain enough information to identify that person. It also declined to waive service for “Nurse Collette” because that person was not a Department of Correction employee. New York City Health & Hospitals later identified “Nurse Collette” as Colette Raspanti and supplied a service address.
Service of Colette Raspanti
The court ordered the Clerk of Court to complete a U.S. Marshals Service Process Receipt and Return form for Raspanti, issue a summons, and give the Marshals Service the paperwork needed to serve her. If the complaint is not served within 90 days after the summons is issued, Francis should ask for more time to complete service.
Identifying C.O. Garcia
The court directed Francis to submit, within 30 days of the order, a letter with more detailed and descriptive information about C.O. Garcia. The New York City Law Department must then, if possible, identify Garcia within 30 days after Francis provides that information. The order also describes different service-address procedures depending on whether Garcia is or was a Department of Correction employee or worked at a Department of Correction facility without being a Department of Correction employee.
Disposition
This order directed steps for serving defendants and identifying C.O. Garcia. It did not decide the merits of Francis’s inadequate-medical-care allegations. Judge Margaret M. Garnett also directed the Clerk to update the docket to show that “Nurse Collette” is Colette Raspanti, complete the service form with Raspanti’s address, deliver the necessary documents to the Marshals Service, and mail the order and complaint to the New York City Law Department.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.