Plasencia v. City of New York Department of Education

Background

Cindy Plasencia brought this action without a lawyer against the City of New York Department of Education and Maureen Fullerton. The opinion says she asserted claims under the Family and Medical Leave Act, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, and the New York State Human Rights Law. The court said her allegations of age and disability discrimination could also be read to assert claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act.

The court had previously granted Plasencia permission to proceed without paying filing fees. The opinion explains that complaints filed by people receiving that permission must be screened for certain defects, including frivolousness, failure to state a legally valid claim, immunity from monetary relief, or lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. The order does not state that the court dismissed any of Plasencia's claims or decide the merits of her allegations.

Service of the Defendants

Because Plasencia was proceeding without paying filing fees, she could rely on the court and the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the defendants. The court extended the time for service to 90 days after the summons is issued, rather than 90 days after the complaint was filed. The court stated that, if service is not completed within that period, Plasencia should request an extension.

The Clerk of Court was directed to complete a U.S. Marshals Service Process Receipt and Return form for each defendant, issue the summonses, and give the Marshals Service the documents needed for service. The listed defendants and service information were the City of New York Department of Education, through the New York City Law Department, and Maureen Fullerton, identified as a principal at Public School 160.

Other Instructions and Disposition

The Clerk was directed to mail Plasencia a copy of the order and an information package. Plasencia was required to notify the court in writing if her address changes, and the court stated that the action could be dismissed if she failed to do so.

Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr. certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith. The court therefore denied permission to appeal without paying filing fees. The order otherwise directed service and did not resolve the underlying employment-discrimination claims.