Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Aug. 19, 2026

Latimore v. Dutchess County Sheriff’s Department

Judge
Kenneth Karas
Docket
7:26-cv-04809
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
7
Civil ProcedureSection 1983Pro Se
In one sentence

In Shannon Latimore v. Dutchess County Sheriff’s Department, Judge Karas dismissed two entities, added Dutchess County, and ordered service on remaining defendants.

Who this affects

Shannon Latimore; the Dutchess County Sheriff’s Department or Office; the Dutchess County Justice and Transition Center; the County of Dutchess; Sheriff Kirk Imperati; Theresa Lee; Beth Schenella; Correctional Officer Trotta; and Correctional Officer Baker.

What happened

In Shannon Latimore v. Dutchess County Sheriff’s Department, Shannon Latimore, representing himself, brought claims for damages and court orders under a federal civil-rights law and state law based on events at the Dutchess County Justice and Transition Center. The court had previously allowed him to proceed without paying filing fees upfront.

The court dismissed the Dutchess County Sheriff’s Department and the Justice and Transition Center as defendants, added Dutchess County, and dismissed the claims against the individual defendants in their official capacities. It directed the United States Marshals Service to serve Dutchess County and the individual defendants who remained listed for service.

Judge Karas also extended the service deadline to 90 days after the summonses are issued, required Latimore to report address changes, and denied permission to appeal without paying fees because the court found an appeal would not be taken in good faith. The order did not decide the underlying claims.

The detailed version

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

Case
Latimore v. Dutchess County Sheriff’s Department · No. 7:26-cv-04809
Judge
Kenneth Karas
Date
Aug. 19, 2026

Background

Shannon Latimore brought the action without a lawyer, seeking damages and injunctive relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and state law. He alleged that the events underlying his claims occurred while he was held at the Dutchess County Justice and Transition Center. He named the Dutchess County Sheriff’s Department or Office, Sheriff Kirk Imperati, the Justice and Transition Center, Superintendent or Warden Theresa Lee, Deputy Superintendent or Warden Beth Schenella, and Correctional Officers Trotta and Baker. The opinion states that Latimore sued the individual defendants in their official capacities.

The court had previously allowed Latimore to proceed without prepaying filing fees. When a person proceeds this way, the court must screen the complaint and dismiss claims that are frivolous, malicious, legally insufficient, seek money from an immune defendant, or fall outside the court’s subject-matter jurisdiction. The court also said that it must read filings by people without lawyers liberally, while still requiring enough facts to make a claim plausible under the federal pleading rules.

Defendants and Official-Capacity Claims

The court used Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 21, which allows a court to add or remove a party, to replace the Dutchess County Sheriff’s Department or Office and the Justice and Transition Center with the County of Dutchess. The court stated that both entities are part of Dutchess County and treated the County as the proper institutional defendant.

The court also dismissed Latimore’s claims under Section 1983 against Imperati, Lee, Schenella, Trotta, and Baker in their official capacities. It explained that an official-capacity claim against a municipal officer is treated as a claim against the municipality itself, so the County could be sued directly instead.

Service of Process

Because Latimore was allowed to proceed without prepaying fees, the court directed the Clerk of Court and the United States Marshals Service to assist with service. The Clerk was instructed to issue summonses and prepare service forms for the County, Imperati, Lee, Schenella, Trotta, and Baker, and to provide the Marshals Service with the documents needed to serve them.

The court extended the time for service until 90 days after the summonses are issued. It stated that Latimore must notify the court in writing if his address changes and that the action may be dismissed if he fails to do so.

Disposition

The court directed the Clerk to dismiss the Dutchess County Sheriff’s Department or Office and the Justice and Transition Center, add the County of Dutchess as a defendant, and arrange service on the County and the five individual defendants. The court also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without paying fees. This order addressed the proper parties, official-capacity claims, screening, and service; it did not decide whether Latimore’s underlying factual claims were legally valid.

The authoritative version

Read the full 7-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.