Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Sept. 16, 2025

Williams v. New York State Trooper Matthew Hughes

Full caption

Dominique Williams v. New York State Trooper Matthew Hughes, in his individual capacity

Judge
Philip Halpern
Docket
7:20-cv-10571
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureDiscovery
In one sentence

In Williams v. Hughes, Judge Halpern granted Williams’s unopposed motion to serve McVea’s trial subpoena by email, certified mail, and posting.

Who this affects

The ruling affects Dominique Williams’s ability to serve Kelli McVea with a trial subpoena and permits the specified alternative service methods. Matthew Hughes did not oppose the motion.

What happened

In Dominique Williams v. New York State Trooper Matthew Hughes, Williams asked the court to allow alternative service of a trial subpoena on Kelli McVea.

The court found that the proposed methods were reasonably likely to give McVea adequate notice. It granted the unopposed motion and allowed service by email, certified mail to the Queensbury address, and posting the subpoena on the door there.

Judge Philip M. Halpern also directed the Clerk of Court to terminate the pending motion.

The detailed version

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

Case
Williams v. New York State Trooper Matthew Hughes · No. 7:20-cv-10571
Judge
Philip Halpern
Date
Sept. 16, 2025

Background

On September 8, 2025, Dominique Williams moved for permission to use alternative service for a trial subpoena directed to Kelli McVea. Alternative service is a method other than the usual form of personal delivery. Matthew Hughes filed a response on September 15, 2025, as the court had directed, and stated that he did not oppose the requested relief.

Court’s Analysis

The court concluded that Williams had provided enough facts and evidence to show that the proposed alternative service was reasonably calculated, under the circumstances, to give McVea adequate notice of the trial subpoena.

Ruling

The court granted the unopposed motion. Williams was permitted to serve McVea using all three of these methods: email to the listed email address, certified mail to the Queensbury address, and affixing the subpoena to the door of that address. The Clerk of Court was requested to terminate the pending motion identified as Doc. 211.

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.