Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled May 6, 2025

Wynder, JR. v. Goltzer, Esq.

Judge
Gregory Woods
Docket
1:24-cv-07925
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Wynder v. Goltzer, Judge Woods ordered another service attempt on Ying Stafford and extended her deadline to provide an address for an estate.

Who this affects

Ying Stafford must be served and must provide an address for serving the Estate of George Goltzer; the plaintiff and Jeremy Schneider were directed to receive copies of the order.

What happened

In Wynder v. Goltzer, the U.S. Marshals Service could not serve Ying Stafford at the address previously provided by the court. The court directed the Marshals Service to try serving her at a new address taken from what appeared to be her professional website.

The court required Stafford to receive the complaint, summons, and several court orders, including an order requiring the plaintiff to explain why the case should not be dismissed. The court also extended Stafford’s deadline to give the plaintiff and the court an address where the Estate of George Goltzer could be served. She must provide that information within 30 days after being served.

Judge Gregory H. Woods also directed the Clerk to mail the order to the plaintiff and Jeremy Schneider. The court stated that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without paying the required filing fees.

The detailed version

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

Case
Wynder, JR. v. Goltzer, Esq. · No. 1:24-cv-07925
Judge
Gregory Woods
Date
May 6, 2025

Background

On December 2, 2024, the court ordered service of the case’s operative complaint and other documents on Ying Stafford through the U.S. Marshals Service. The Marshals Service reported that it could not serve Stafford at the address listed in that order.

Service and deadline

The court directed the Marshals Service to attempt service on Stafford at 36 Ferry Lane East, Suite 100, Westport, Connecticut 06880, an address taken from what appeared to be Stafford’s professional website. The documents to be served include the operative complaint, the summons, the December 2, 2024 order, the May 6, 2025 order requiring the plaintiff to explain why the case should not be dismissed, and this order.

The December 2 order required Stafford to determine where the Estate of George Goltzer could be served and to provide that address to the plaintiff and the court within 60 days. This order extended that deadline. Stafford must provide the address within 30 days after being served with this order.

Other directions and disposition

The Clerk of Court was directed to mail a copy of the order to the plaintiff and Defendant Jeremy Schneider. The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without prepaying filing fees. The order addresses service, notice, and deadlines; it does not decide the underlying claims.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.