Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 4, 2025

Stringer v. SIMON & SCHUSTER, INC

Judge
Vyskocil
Docket
1:25-cv-00670
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Stringer v. Simon & Schuster, Judge Vyskocil ordered the Marshals Service to serve Stringer’s amended complaint after she was allowed to proceed without prepaying fees.

Who this affects

Vickie M. Stringer, Simon & Schuster, Inc., the Clerk of Court, and the U.S. Marshals Service are affected by the service instructions and related deadlines.

What happened

In Stringer v. Simon & Schuster, Vickie M. Stringer, who is representing herself, filed an amended complaint and was previously allowed to proceed without prepaying court fees.

Because Stringer is proceeding without prepaying fees, the court directed the Clerk of Court to issue a summons and provide the necessary documents to the U.S. Marshals Service so it can serve Simon & Schuster, Inc. Stringer must notify the court if her address changes.

Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil ordered these service steps and stated that Stringer should request more time if service is not completed within 90 days after the summons is issued. The order did not decide the merits of Stringer’s claims.

The detailed version

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

Case
Stringer v. SIMON & SCHUSTER, INC · No. 1:25-cv-00670
Judge
Vyskocil
Date
Mar. 4, 2025

Background

Vickie M. Stringer filed an amended complaint against Simon & Schuster, Inc. She invoked federal-question and diversity jurisdiction and is appearing without a lawyer. In an earlier order dated February 5, 2025, the court granted her permission to proceed without prepaying court fees.

Service of the Complaint

Because Stringer is proceeding without prepaying fees, federal law requires the court and the U.S. Marshals Service to assist with serving the defendant. The court explained that Stringer could not serve the defendant until the court reviewed the complaint and ordered the summons issued. The court therefore extended the service period to 90 days after any summons is issued.

The Clerk of Court was directed to issue a summons for Simon & Schuster, Inc., complete the required service form with the defendant’s address, and deliver the amended complaint and other necessary papers to the U.S. Marshals Service. The Clerk was also directed to mail Stringer an information package.

Ruling

Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil ordered the Clerk and the U.S. Marshals Service to take the steps needed to serve Simon & Schuster, Inc. The court stated that Stringer should request an extension of time if the amended complaint is not served within 90 days after the summons is issued. Stringer must also notify the court in writing if her address changes, and the court stated that failure to do so may result in dismissal. This order did not decide the merits of the amended complaint.

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.