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

Pettigrew v. Kirschenbaum & Phillips, P.C.

Judge
Ronnie Abrams
Docket
1:25-cv-02821
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
4
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Pettigrew v. Kirschenbaum, Judge Abrams ordered Marshals service after Pettigrew received permission to proceed without prepaying fees.

Who this affects

Isaac Pettigrew and Kirschenbaum & Phillips, P.C.; the order sets up service of the lawsuit on the defendant through the U.S. Marshals Service.

What happened

Pettigrew v. Kirschenbaum & Phillips, P.C. concerns Isaac Pettigrew’s claims that the law firm violated federal debt-collection and credit-reporting laws and New York law.

Pettigrew is representing himself and had already received permission to proceed without prepaying court fees. Because of that permission, the court said he could rely on the court and the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the defendant.

Judge Ronnie Abrams ordered the Clerk of Court to issue a summons, prepare the service paperwork, and send it to the Marshals Service. The court also extended the service deadline to 90 days after the summons is issued and directed Pettigrew to request more time if service is not completed.

The detailed version

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

Case
Pettigrew v. Kirschenbaum & Phillips, P.C. · No. 1:25-cv-02821
Judge
Ronnie Abrams
Date
Apr. 18, 2025

Background

Isaac Pettigrew, representing himself, sued Kirschenbaum & Phillips, P.C. He alleges violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, the Fair Credit Reporting Act, and New York General Business Law § 349. The opinion does not decide whether those claims have merit.

In an April 16, 2025 order, the court granted Pettigrew permission to proceed without prepaying court fees. In such cases, federal law and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure require the court to direct the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the defendant.

Order

The court instructed the Clerk of Court to issue a summons for Kirschenbaum & Phillips, P.C., complete the U.S. Marshals Service process form with the defendant’s address, and deliver the necessary documents to the Marshals Service so it can serve the defendant.

The court explained that service must be completed within 90 days after the summons is issued. If service is not completed within that period, Pettigrew should request an extension of time. The court also directed Pettigrew to notify it in writing of any address change and stated that the action may be dismissed if he fails to do so.

Disposition

Judge Ronnie Abrams entered an order of service. The court directed the Clerk to issue the summons and arrange for Marshals Service, mailed an information package to Pettigrew, and provided a form allowing him to consent to receiving court documents by email.

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.