Pettigrew v. Bank of America Corporation
- Rearden
- 1:25-cv-00977
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Pettigrew v. Bank of America, Judge Rearden ordered Marshals service for Pettigrew’s Fair Credit Reporting Act and state-law case.
Davy Pettigrew, Bank of America Corporation, the Clerk of Court, and the U.S. Marshals Service.
What happened
In Pettigrew v. Bank of America Corporation, Davy Pettigrew, representing himself, sued Bank of America Corporation under the Fair Credit Reporting Act and state law.
The court had previously allowed Pettigrew to proceed without paying filing fees in advance. This order directed the Clerk of Court to issue a summons, complete the service form, and send the necessary papers to the U.S. Marshals Service so the Marshals could serve Bank of America. The court extended the service deadline to 90 days after the summons is issued.
Judge Jennifer H. Rearden also instructed Pettigrew to request more time if service is not completed within that period and to notify the court if his address changes. The order addressed service and case administration; it did not decide whether Pettigrew’s claims were legally valid.
The detailed version
- Pettigrew v. Bank of America Corporation · No. 1:25-cv-00977
- Rearden
- Feb. 21, 2025
Background
Davy Pettigrew, who is representing himself, brought this action against Bank of America Corporation. The opinion says he alleges violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, a federal law governing credit reporting, and state law. An earlier order dated February 6, 2025, allowed Pettigrew to proceed without paying court fees in advance.
Service of process
Because Pettigrew was allowed to proceed without prepaying fees, the court stated that he could rely on the court and the U.S. Marshals Service to serve Bank of America. The Clerk of Court was directed to complete a U.S. Marshals Service Process Receipt and Return form, issue a summons, and provide the Marshals Service with the documents needed to serve the defendant.
The court extended the usual service period. Instead of measuring the 90-day period from the filing of the complaint, the period will run for 90 days after the summons is issued. If service is not completed within that period, Pettigrew was directed to request an extension of time. He was also required to notify the court in writing if his address changes, and the order states that the court may dismiss the action if he fails to do so.
Ruling
Judge Jennifer H. Rearden ordered the Clerk of Court to issue the summons, complete the service form, and deliver the necessary documents to the U.S. Marshals Service. The Clerk was also directed to mail Pettigrew an information package. This order concerns service and other case administration; it does not decide the merits of the Fair Credit Reporting Act or state-law claims.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.