Beaman v. Bambaa

Background

Shelton Beaman, appearing without a lawyer, brought this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and alleged violations of federal and state law arising from the discontinuation of his public assistance benefits. The opinion states that Beaman first filed a proposed order seeking emergency injunctive relief rather than a complaint. Chief Judge Swain denied that request on January 8, 2025, and directed Beaman to file a complaint. Beaman filed the complaint on January 14, 2025.

The court had granted Beaman permission to proceed without prepaying filing fees. In such cases, the court and the U.S. Marshals Service handle service of the summons and complaint.

Order

The court directed the Clerk of Court to issue a summons for each defendant, complete a U.S. Marshals Service Process Receipt and Return form for each defendant, and deliver the necessary documents to the Marshals Service. The defendants identified for service were Molly Park, Abdul Bamba (or “Bambaa”), and Teresa Duarte.

The court explained that the usual 90-day service period runs differently here because Beaman could not arrange service until the court reviewed the complaint and ordered the summonses issued. The court extended the service period until 90 days after the summonses are issued. If the complaint is not served within that period, Beaman should request an extension of time. The court also stated that Beaman must notify it in writing if his address changes and that the action may be dismissed if he fails to do so.

Disposition and significance

This was an order arranging service of the lawsuit. It did not decide whether the defendants unlawfully discontinued Beaman’s benefits or whether his claims otherwise succeed. Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil directed the Clerk to issue the summonses and provide the service materials to the U.S. Marshals Service, and directed that an information package be mailed to Beaman.