Brown v. Annucci
- Vincent Briccetti
- 7:19-cv-09048
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Brown v. Annucci, Judge Briccetti extended defense counsel’s deadline to identify a John Doe officer and denied fee-free appeal status.
Defense counsel was given until February 20, 2020, to identify the John Doe correctional officer’s badge number and provide it to the court. Brown was to receive a mailed copy of the order, and any appeal would not qualify for fee-free status.
What happened
In Brown v. Annucci, the court addressed defense counsel’s failure to identify a correctional officer listed as John Doe in the amended complaint.
The court had ordered counsel to find the officer’s badge number and provide it by February 12, 2020. Counsel did not provide the information, so the court reminded counsel that its orders were mandatory.
Judge Briccetti extended the deadline to February 20, 2020, and denied fee-free status for any appeal because the court certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith. The Clerk was also directed to mail the order to Brown.
The detailed version
- Brown v. Annucci · No. 7:19-cv-09048
- Vincent Briccetti
- Feb. 14, 2020
Background
The court had issued a Third Amended Order of Service on January 22, 2020. That order required defense counsel to determine and identify the badge number of the John Doe correctional officer named in the amended complaint and provide the information to the court by February 12, 2020. A February 6 order reminded counsel of this obligation.
Court’s Action
Defense counsel had not provided the information by the deadline. The court stated that its orders were not suggestions. It extended defense counsel’s time to comply with both the Third Amended Order of Service and the February 6 order until February 20, 2020.
Appeal Certification and Mailing
The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal. The Clerk was directed to mail a copy of the order to Brown at the address listed on the docket.
Disposition
This was a procedural order. The court extended the compliance deadline and denied fee-free status for an appeal; it did not decide the underlying claims against the defendants.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.