Price v. Koenigsmann

Background

Tyrone Price brought this action without a lawyer against Dr. Carl Koenigsmann, Robert Bentivegna, Thomas Griffen, and an unidentified defendant named Dr. K. The defendants told the court that they could not identify Dr. K based on the allegations in the complaint. The court then ordered Price to provide additional identifying information.

Price responded that he had no further information about Dr. K and could not provide even a physical description. The opinion states that Price had not sought discovery to identify Dr. K. The defendants reviewed the paperwork then available concerning Price’s medical care and spoke with staff at Green Haven, but they were unable to determine Dr. K’s identity. They suggested that Dr. K might refer to Dr. Koenigsmann, who was already a named and served defendant.

Legal standard

The court discussed the Second Circuit’s rule that courts generally should help self-represented plaintiffs identify unknown defendants. That duty includes making some inquiry into whether the unidentified defendant exists and can be located. But when the available information is insufficient to identify the defendant specifically enough for service of process, dismissal may be warranted. The court also noted that courts need not raise the possibility of discovery or prompt a plaintiff to seek it.

Ruling

The court found that the defendants’ inquiry was sufficient. Because Price could not provide additional identifying information, the court found an impasse and terminated the unidentified Dr. K from the case. The Clerk of Court was directed to mail the order to Price and terminate Dr. K as a defendant.