Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Oct. 31, 2025

Simmons v. City of White Plains

Full caption

Diamond Chanel Simmons v. City of White Plains; SPCA of Westchester; Detective Ferdinando “Fred” Cianci; Sergeant Todd Horgan; Ernest Lungaro

Judge
Cathy Seibel
Docket
7:25-cv-08613
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
4
Civil ProcedureSection 1983Pro Se
In one sentence

In Simmons v. City of White Plains, Judge Seibel ordered U.S. Marshals service for Simmons’s federal civil-rights lawsuit after allowing her to proceed without fees.

Who this affects

Diamond Chanel Simmons, the five named defendants, the Clerk of Court, and the U.S. Marshals Service. The order requires the Clerk and Marshals Service to begin serving the defendants and requires Simmons to monitor the service deadline and report any address change.

What happened

Diamond Chanel Simmons is representing herself in Simmons v. City of White Plains, a lawsuit under federal civil-rights law against the City of White Plains, SPCA of Westchester, Detective Ferdinando “Fred” Cianci, Sergeant Todd Horgan, and Ernest Lungaro. The court had allowed her to proceed without paying filing fees in advance, and her amended complaint is the operative pleading.

Because Simmons was allowed to proceed without paying fees in advance, the court ordered the Clerk of Court to issue summonses and prepare service forms for each defendant. The U.S. Marshals Service will receive the necessary documents and serve the defendants. Simmons must ask for more time if service is not completed within 90 days after the summonses are issued, and she must notify the court in writing if her address changes.

The order concerns service of the lawsuit and does not decide whether Simmons’s constitutional-rights allegations are valid. Judge Seibel directed the Clerk to issue the summonses, provide the service paperwork to the Marshals Service, and mail Simmons an information package.

The detailed version

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

Case
Simmons v. City of White Plains · No. 7:25-cv-08613
Judge
Cathy Seibel
Date
Oct. 31, 2025

Background

Diamond Chanel Simmons, who is representing herself, brings a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal law allowing claims for violations of federal constitutional rights by persons acting under state law. She names the City of White Plains, SPCA of Westchester, Detective Ferdinando “Fred” Cianci, Sergeant Todd Horgan, and Ernest Lungaro as defendants. The opinion states that Simmons filed the complaint on October 17, 2025, and filed an amended complaint on October 29, 2025; the amended complaint is the operative pleading.

The court had previously granted Simmons permission to proceed without paying filing fees in advance. In such cases, federal law and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure require the court to direct the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the defendants.

Order

The court directed the Clerk of Court to complete a U.S. Marshals Service Process Receipt and Return form for each defendant, issue summonses, and provide the Marshals Service with the documents needed to serve the defendants. The opinion lists service addresses for the City of White Plains, Detective Cianci, Sergeant Horgan, SPCA of Westchester, and Ernest Lungaro.

The court stated that service must occur within 90 days after the summonses are issued. If service is not completed within that period, Simmons should request an extension of time. The court also directed Simmons to notify it in writing if her address changes and warned that the action may be dismissed if she fails to do so.

Disposition and significance

The court entered an order directing service. It did not decide the merits of Simmons’s federal constitutional-rights allegations or determine whether any defendant violated her rights. The Clerk was also directed to mail Simmons an information package.

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.