Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Oct. 28, 2025

Jordan v. Doe

Judge
John Cronan
Docket
1:25-cv-06496
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Section 1983Civil RightsPro SeCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In David Jordan v. John Doe, Judge Cronan ordered officials to identify unnamed officers so Jordan could amend and serve his civil-rights complaint.

Who this affects

David Jordan and the two unnamed New York City police officers he seeks to sue; the New York City Police Department and New York City Law Department must assist with identifying and serving those officers.

What happened

In David Jordan v. John Doe, David Jordan, who is detained at the George R. Vierno Center on Rikers Island, alleged that two unidentified New York City police officers falsely arrested him and used excessive force. He brought the case without a lawyer under a federal civil-rights law.

The court said the complaint provided enough information for the New York City Police Department to identify the two unnamed officers. It ordered the New York City Law Department to provide their identities, badge numbers, and service addresses within 60 days.

Judge Cronan also ordered Jordan to file a replacement complaint naming the officers within 30 days after receiving that information. The order set procedures for issuing a new summons and serving the officers, but it did not decide whether Jordan’s allegations were true.

The detailed version

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

Case
Jordan v. Doe · No. 1:25-cv-06496
Judge
John Cronan
Date
Oct. 28, 2025

Background

David Jordan, who is detained at the George R. Vierno Center on Rikers Island, filed this action without a lawyer under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He alleged that on September 23, 2023, Captain Anderson, whom he identified as an unnamed police captain, and another unnamed police officer assigned to the New York City Police Department’s 25th Precinct in Manhattan falsely arrested him and subjected him to excessive force.

Identification of Unnamed Defendants

The court relied on Valentin v. Dinkins, which provides that a person proceeding without a lawyer is entitled to the district court’s help identifying a defendant when the complaint supplies enough information. The court found that Jordan’s complaint provided sufficient information for the New York City Police Department to identify the two unnamed defendants.

The court ordered the New York City Law Department, described in the order as the attorney and agent for the Police Department, to determine the officers’ identities, badge numbers, and addresses where they could be served. The Law Department must provide that information to Jordan and the court within 60 days of the order. The clerk was directed to notify the Police Department and the Law Department, and the court requested that the defendants waive service of the summons.

Amended Complaint and Service

After receiving the identification information, Jordan must file an amended complaint naming the two officers within 30 days. The amended complaint will replace, rather than supplement, the original complaint. If Jordan files it, the clerk must issue an amended summons, and the Pro Se Office must send him an amended service package. Jordan will then have 120 days from issuance of the amended summons to serve the two officers.

Disposition

The order addresses identification of unnamed defendants and the next steps for amending and serving the complaint. Judge John P. Cronan did not decide whether the alleged false arrest or excessive force occurred or whether Jordan is entitled to relief.

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.