Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Oct. 22, 2025

Starke v. Fuentes

Judge
Philip Halpern
Docket
7:25-cv-03108
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
4
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

Starke v. Fuentes: Judge Halpern extended the service deadline and ordered the Marshals Service to try serving two defendants at a courthouse address.

Who this affects

The order affects Charles Bernard Starke, Jr., Officer Fuentes, Kelvin Zuniga, the Clerk of Court, and the U.S. Marshals Service by arranging another service attempt and extending the service deadline.

What happened

In Charles Bernard Starke, Jr. v. Officer Fuentes, et al., Charles Bernard Starke, Jr., who is detained and representing himself, alleges that municipal and police entities and associated individuals violated state and federal laws. He was permitted to proceed without paying filing fees in advance, and the court ordered the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the defendants.

Service on Officer Fuentes and Kelvin Zuniga was unsuccessful. Starke told the court that they worked at the Rockland County Courthouse, but Rockland County's counsel said they were not county employees and, based on the information available, might be New York State court officers stationed there.

The court extended the service deadline to 90 days after the summons is issued and ordered the Clerk of Court to prepare new service forms and paperwork for the Marshals Service, using the Rockland County Supreme and County Court address. Judge Philip M. Halpern did not decide the underlying claims.

The detailed version

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

Case
Starke v. Fuentes · No. 7:25-cv-03108
Judge
Philip Halpern
Date
Oct. 22, 2025

Background

Charles Bernard Starke, Jr., who is detained at the Rockland County Jail and is proceeding without a lawyer, brought this action against Officer Fuentes and other defendants. He alleges that various municipal and police entities and associated individuals violated state and federal laws. The court had previously permitted him to proceed without prepaying filing fees and had directed the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the defendants.

The Marshals Service returned its service forms showing that service on Officer Fuentes and Kelvin Zuniga was unsuccessful. Starke later told the court that Fuentes and Zuniga were employed at the Rockland County Courthouse. Counsel for Rockland County responded that they were not employed by Rockland County and, based on the information available, were New York State court officers who might be stationed at the courthouse.

Service Deadline

Because Starke was permitted to proceed without prepaying fees, the court explained that he was entitled to rely on the court and the Marshals Service to attempt service. The court also explained that the usual 90-day service period could not begin for him until the court reviewed the complaint and ordered a summons issued.

The court therefore extended the time for service until 90 days after the summons is issued. It stated that, if service is not completed within that period, Starke should request an additional extension. The court cited decisions explaining that a plaintiff proceeding without prepaying fees may have good cause for an extension when the Marshals Service cannot complete service despite receiving the information needed to identify a defendant.

Order

The court instructed the Clerk of Court to prepare new U.S. Marshals Service process forms for Fuentes and Zuniga, using this address: Rockland County Supreme and County Court, 1 South Main Street, New City, New York 10956. The Clerk was also instructed to issue a summons and deliver the necessary documents to the Marshals Service so it could attempt service. The court directed that a copy of the order and an information package be mailed to Starke.

This order concerns service of process only. It does not decide whether Starke's underlying claims are legally valid or whether any defendant violated his rights.

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.