Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Apr. 18, 2025

Brown v. Laino

Judge
Philip Halpern
Docket
7:24-cv-06677
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
4
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Brown v. Laino, Judge Halpern arranged service on McNeil and Rogers through the Marshals Service and denied Brown permission to appeal without paying fees.

Who this affects

Carl Brown, Officers McNeil and Rogers, the Clerk of Court, and the U.S. Marshals Service.

What happened

In Brown v. Laino, Carl Brown was allowed to proceed without paying the court’s filing fees, so the court and the U.S. Marshals Service were responsible for serving his complaint. The New York Attorney General’s Office reported that Officers McNeil and Rogers had provided service information and authorized the Department of Corrections and Community Supervision to accept service for them.

The court directed the Clerk to issue amended summonses, complete the required service forms, and send the necessary papers to the Marshals Service. Service must occur within 90 days after the summonses are issued, although Brown may request more time. The order did not decide the underlying claims.

Judge Halpern also directed the Clerk to mail Brown an information package and reminded him to report any address change in writing. The court denied permission to appeal without paying fees, finding that an appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith.

The detailed version

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

Case
Brown v. Laino · No. 7:24-cv-06677
Judge
Philip Halpern
Date
Apr. 18, 2025

Background

Carl Brown was authorized to proceed without paying the filing fee. In an earlier order, the court directed the New York Attorney General’s Office to contact Officers McNeil and Rogers about service of Brown’s complaint. The office later reported that McNeil and Rogers had authorized the Department of Corrections and Community Supervision to accept service on their behalf and provided updated business addresses for them.

Service Order

Because Brown was authorized to proceed without paying the filing fee, federal law requires the court to order the U.S. Marshals Service to serve process for him. The court directed the Clerk of Court to issue amended summonses for McNeil and Rogers, complete the required U.S. Marshals Service Process Receipt and Return forms with their addresses, and deliver the necessary documents to the Marshals Service.

The court stated that the complaint must be served within 90 days after the summonses are issued. If service is not completed by then, Brown should ask for an extension of time. The court also reminded Brown that he must notify the court in writing if his address changes and that the action may be dismissed if he does not do so.

Disposition

Judge Halpern directed the Clerk to issue the amended summonses, complete the service forms, send the documents to the Marshals Service, and mail Brown an information package. The court certified that an appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith and denied Brown permission to appeal without paying the required fees. The order addressed service and the cost of an appeal; it did not decide the merits of Brown’s claims.

The authoritative version

Read the full 4-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.