Duncan v. City of New York

Background

Branden Duncan paid the filing fees and brought claims under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1985, along with state-law claims. The claims arise from an incident that began on March 9, 2023. The defendants named in the caption are the City of New York, Officer Amir, Officer Wildania Hernandez, and two unidentified John Doe officers.

Summonses and Service

The court directed the Clerk of Court to issue summonses for the City of New York, Police Officer Wildania Hernandez, and Police Officer Amir. Duncan must serve each of those defendants within 90 days after the summonses are issued. If he neither serves them nor requests an extension within that period, the court may dismiss the claims against them for failure to prosecute under Rules 4 and 41 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Identifying the Doe Defendants

The court stated that a person representing himself without a lawyer is entitled to the district court’s assistance in identifying a defendant. It found that Duncan had provided enough information for the New York City Police Department to identify the two Doe officers allegedly present during a traffic stop at Tenth Avenue and West 15th Street in Manhattan, at about 1:18 p.m. on March 9, 2023. One Doe officer was described as white and as directing Duncan not to reach for his cell phone. The other was described as Black and as driving Duncan’s vehicle to the Sixth Precinct.

The court directed the New York City Law Department, identified as the NYPD’s attorney and agent, to determine each Doe officer’s identity, badge number, and service address. The Law Department must also provide Duncan and the court with Officer Amir’s full name and badge number. That information must be provided within 60 days after the order’s date.

Amended Complaint and Disposition

Within 30 days after receiving the information, Duncan must file an amended complaint naming the Doe defendants. The amended complaint will replace, rather than supplement, the original complaint. After filing it, Duncan may ask the Clerk to issue summonses for the newly identified defendants and must serve them.

This was an order about service and identifying defendants; it did not decide the merits of Duncan’s federal or state-law claims. The caption names Officer Wildania Hernandez, while one discussion passage refers to “Police Officers Wildania Ramirez and Amir”; the opinion does not explain that discrepancy.