Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled May 2, 2025

Folborg v. Blot

Judge
Philip Halpern
Docket
7:24-cv-08913
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
4
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Folborg v. Blot, Judge Halpern identified two defendants for service, amended the complaint, and denied fee-free appeal status.

Who this affects

Akil Folborg, Sergeant Alexander Schmitt, and Correction Officer Lewis Boyd are directly affected. The Clerk of Court and the U.S. Marshals Service were directed to take steps to serve Schmitt and Boyd.

What happened

In Folborg v. Blot, the New York Attorney General identified Sergeant Alexander Schmitt and Correction Officer Lewis Boyd as the employees who allegedly participated in the cell extraction described in Akil Folborg’s complaint.

The court replaced the two John Doe defendants with Schmitt and Boyd. It directed the Clerk of Court to issue summonses, complete service forms, and send the necessary papers to the U.S. Marshals Service. The service period was extended to 90 days after the summonses are issued.

Judge Philip M. Halpern also reminded Folborg to report any address change and ruled that he could not proceed without paying filing fees for an appeal from this order. The order did not decide the underlying claims.

The detailed version

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

Case
Folborg v. Blot · No. 7:24-cv-08913
Judge
Philip Halpern
Date
May 2, 2025

Background

The court had previously directed the New York State Attorney General to identify the correctional officer and sergeant referred to as John Doe defendants in Akil Folborg’s complaint. The Attorney General reported that, based on its investigation and information from the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision, Sergeant Alexander Schmitt and Correction Officer Lewis Boyd were the employees who participated in the alleged cell extraction at Green Haven Correctional Facility on November 9, 2021.

Court’s Actions

The court deemed the complaint amended to replace “Officer John Doe” with Correction Officer Lewis Boyd and “Sergeant John Doe” with Sergeant Alexander Schmitt. Because Folborg had permission to proceed without paying the court’s filing fees, the court stated that he could rely on the court and the U.S. Marshals Service to carry out service of process.

The Clerk of Court was directed to issue summonses for Schmitt and Boyd, complete the required service forms with their addresses, and deliver the necessary documents to the U.S. Marshals Service. The court extended the deadline for serving these defendants to 90 days after the summonses are issued. It also directed the Clerk to mail Folborg an information package.

Other Rulings

The court reminded Folborg that he must notify the court in writing if his address changes and stated that the action may be dismissed if he fails to do so. Judge Philip M. Halpern certified that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without paying filing fees. The order addressed defendant identification and service; it did not resolve the merits of Folborg’s underlying 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.