Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 26, 2025

Tindall v. United States

Judge
Cathy Seibel
Docket
7:24-cv-09831
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Tindall v. United States, Judge Seibel ordered the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the United States in Tindall’s Federal Tort Claims Act case.

Who this affects

Lamar Tindall and the United States; the order also directs the Clerk of Court and the U.S. Marshals Service to carry out service.

What happened

In Tindall v. United States, Lamar Tindall, who is incarcerated at F.C.I. Otisville, brought a case himself under the Federal Tort Claims Act. The court had already allowed him to proceed without prepaying filing fees.

Because Tindall was allowed to proceed without prepaying fees, the court said he could rely on the court and the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the United States. The court also extended the service deadline to 90 days after the summons is issued.

Judge Cathy Seibel ordered the Clerk of Court to issue the summons, complete the required service form, and provide the necessary documents to the U.S. Marshals Service. The order did not decide the merits of Tindall’s claims.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Tindall v. United States · No. 7:24-cv-09831
Judge
Cathy Seibel
Date
Feb. 26, 2025

Background

Lamar Tindall, who is incarcerated at F.C.I. Otisville in Otisville, New York, brought this action without a lawyer under the Federal Tort Claims Act. On February 21, 2025, the court granted his request to proceed without prepaying filing fees. The court noted that prisoners still must pay the full filing fee under the applicable statute, even when permitted to proceed without prepayment.

Service of Process

Because Tindall was permitted to proceed without prepaying fees, the court stated that he could rely on the court and the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the United States. The court directed the Clerk of Court to complete a U.S. Marshals Service Process Receipt and Return form for the United States, mark that service was for the United States, issue a summons, and provide the Marshals Service with this order and the other documents needed for service.

The court explained that although service generally must occur within 90 days after a complaint is filed, Tindall could not have served the United States until the court reviewed the complaint and ordered the summons issued. The court therefore extended the service period to 90 days after the summons is issued. If service is not completed within that period, Tindall should request an extension. The court also required him to notify the court in writing if his address changes and warned that the action could be dismissed if he fails to do so.

Ruling

Judge Cathy Seibel ordered the Clerk of Court to issue the summons, complete the service form, and deliver the necessary documents to the U.S. Marshals Service for service on the United States. The Clerk was also directed to mail Tindall an information package. This order addressed service and did not decide the merits of the Federal Tort Claims Act action.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.