Herbert v. Sgt. Romeo Riley
Jeremiah F. Herbert v. Sgt. Romeo Riley, Sgt. Jayson George, Sgt. Alicia Johnson, Correction Officer Sakaya Cameron, and Correction Officer Ashton Jones
- Philip Halpern
- 7:25-cv-04578
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Herbert v. Riley, Judge Halpern ordered Marshals to serve Ashton Jones after allowing Herbert to amend the defendant’s name.
Jeremiah F. Herbert and Correction Officer Ashton Jones are directly affected. The order also directs the Clerk of Court and the U.S. Marshals Service to take steps to serve Jones.
What happened
Jeremiah F. Herbert, representing himself, brought a constitutional-rights lawsuit under a federal civil-rights law against several correctional employees. After the Marshals Service could not serve a defendant identified as B. Jones, Herbert asked to replace that defendant with Correction Officer Ashton Jones.
The court accepted the amendment, ended B. Jones’s status as a defendant, and directed the Clerk to prepare new service paperwork for Ashton Jones at Sing Sing Correctional Facility. The court also extended the service deadline to 90 days after the summons is issued and explained that the Marshals Service would carry out service because Herbert had permission to proceed without paying the filing fee upfront.
Judge Philip M. Halpern ordered the Clerk to send the paperwork to the Marshals Service and mail Herbert a copy of the order and an information package. The order did not decide whether the defendants violated Herbert’s constitutional rights.
The detailed version
- Herbert v. Sgt. Romeo Riley · No. 7:25-cv-04578
- Philip Halpern
- Oct. 28, 2025
Background
Jeremiah F. Herbert, who is incarcerated at Eastern Correctional Facility, filed this lawsuit without a lawyer under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that the defendants violated his constitutional rights. The court had previously allowed Herbert to proceed without prepaying filing fees and directed the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the defendants.
The Marshals Service reported that service on Defendant B. Jones was unsuccessful. The service paperwork was returned with a new address label for Upstate Correctional Facility. Herbert later asked to amend the complaint to replace B. Jones with “officer Ashton Jones,” stating that B. Jones had been named improperly. After the New York State Attorney General’s Office confirmed that Correction Officer Ashton Jones was assigned to Sing Sing Correctional Facility, the court treated the complaint as amended and directed the Clerk to terminate B. Jones as a defendant.
Court’s Action
Because Herbert was permitted to proceed without prepaying fees, the court explained that he could rely on the court and the Marshals Service to serve the defendants. The court extended the usual service period to 90 days after the summons is issued because Herbert could not serve the defendants until the court reviewed the complaint and ordered issuance of a summons.
The court instructed the Clerk to complete a new U.S. Marshals Service Process Receipt and Return form for Correction Officer Ashton Jones, using this address: Sing Sing Correctional Facility, 354 Hunter Street, Ossining, New York 10562-5442. The Clerk was also directed to issue a summons and provide the Marshals Service with the documents needed to serve Jones. The court stated that, if service at that address failed, it could direct the New York State Attorney General to identify a residential address where Jones could be served.
Result
Judge Philip M. Halpern ordered the Clerk to send Herbert a copy of the order and an information package and to provide the service materials to the Marshals Service. This was an order concerning amendment and service of the lawsuit; it did not resolve the merits of Herbert’s constitutional claims.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.