Heilmann v. Yeshiva University
- Analisa Torres
- 1:25-cv-02491
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Heilmann v. Yeshiva University, Judge Torres ordered Marshals Service service and granted electronic filing permission without deciding the allegations.
Yisrael Z. Heilmann, the defendants, the Clerk of Court, and the U.S. Marshals Service. Heilmann receives court-arranged service and electronic-filing permission; the Clerk and Marshals Service are assigned service-related tasks; and the defendants are to be served.
What happened
In Heilmann v. Yeshiva University, Yisrael Heilmann, who is representing himself, sued Yeshiva University and other defendants under disability-related federal laws and state law.
After previously allowing Heilmann to proceed without prepaying court fees, the court directed the Clerk to issue summonses and provide the paperwork needed for the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the defendants. The court also granted Heilmann permission to file documents electronically.
Judge Torres did not decide whether Heilmann’s allegations were valid. The order states that Heilmann must request more time if service is not completed within 90 days after summonses are issued and must notify the court of any address change.
The detailed version
- Heilmann v. Yeshiva University · No. 1:25-cv-02491
- Analisa Torres
- Apr. 3, 2025
Background
Yisrael Z. Heilmann, proceeding without a lawyer, brought claims against Yeshiva University and several individuals. The opinion says he alleged violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Rehabilitation Act, and state law.
The court had previously granted Heilmann permission to proceed without prepaying filing fees. This status requires the court to arrange service of the summons and complaint through the U.S. Marshals Service rather than requiring Heilmann to pay for or arrange service himself.
Rulings
The court directed the Clerk of Court to complete the Marshals Service process forms, issue summonses, and provide the Marshals Service with the paperwork needed to serve the defendants. The order states that the service period runs for 90 days after the summonses are issued. If service is not completed during that period, Heilmann should request an extension. He must also notify the court in writing if his address changes; the court stated that it may dismiss the action if he fails to do so.
The court granted Heilmann’s motion for permission to file documents electronically. After he registers for electronic filing, court and party documents will be served through electronic notice to his designated email address instead of by postal mail. The Clerk was directed to send Heilmann an information package and terminate the electronic-filing motion.
What the Order Did Not Decide
The order addressed service of process and electronic filing. It did not decide the merits of Heilmann’s disability or state-law allegations.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.