Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled June 3, 2025

Browne v. Brusca

Judge
Kenneth Karas
Docket
7:25-cv-03467
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
Civil ProcedureSection 1983Pro Se
In one sentence

In Browne v. Brusca, Judge Karas ordered U.S. Marshals to serve the plaintiff’s federal-claims lawsuit on two state troopers.

Who this affects

Kendall Browne, who must keep the court informed of any address change; defendants Thomas Brusca and C. Hickey, who are to be served; and the Clerk of Court and United States Marshals Service, which must carry out the service process.

What happened

In Browne v. Brusca, Kendall Browne, representing himself, sued New York State Police Troopers Thomas Brusca and C. Hickey under a federal civil-rights law, alleging violations of the Constitution. The court had already allowed Browne to proceed without paying filing fees upfront.

The court ordered the Clerk of Court to issue summonses, prepare service forms, and provide the necessary documents to the U.S. Marshals Service. The Marshals are to serve the summonses and complaint on Brusca and Hickey. The court extended the service deadline to 90 days after the summonses are issued.

Judge Kenneth M. Karas also directed Browne to notify the court if his address changes and warned that the case could be dismissed if he does not. This order arranged service and did not decide whether Browne’s claims are valid.

The detailed version

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

Case
Browne v. Brusca · No. 7:25-cv-03467
Judge
Kenneth Karas
Date
June 3, 2025

Background

Kendall Browne, proceeding without a lawyer, brought the action against New York State Police Troopers Thomas Brusca and C. Hickey. The opinion says Browne asserts claims that the defendants violated the federal Constitution under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal law allowing claims against state actors for certain constitutional violations.

On May 1, 2025, the court granted Browne permission to proceed without paying filing fees upfront. Because Browne was allowed to proceed this way, the court said he could rely on the court and the United States Marshals Service to serve the defendants.

Order

The court directed the Clerk of Court to issue a summons for each defendant, complete a U.S. Marshals Service Process Receipt and Return form for each defendant, and give the Marshals all paperwork needed to serve each defendant with the summons and complaint.

The court extended the time for service until 90 days after the summonses for Brusca and Hickey are issued. If service is not completed within that period, Browne should request an extension of time. The court also directed the Clerk to mail Browne an information package.

Browne must notify the court in writing if his address changes. The order states that the court may dismiss the action if he fails to do so. The order addresses service of the lawsuit and does not decide the merits of Browne’s constitutional claims.

Disposition

The court ordered service of the summonses and complaint through the United States Marshals Service. It did not grant or deny judgment on the claims.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-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.