Ruiz v. Link
- Cathy Seibel
- 7:20-cv-00235
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 11
In Michael Ruiz v. Link, Judge Seibel ordered service and identification of unknown officers without deciding Ruiz’s constitutional claims.
Michael Ruiz, the named correctional officers and registered nurse, the four unidentified correctional officers, the New York State Attorney General, the Clerk of Court, and the U.S. Marshals Service.
What happened
Michael Ruiz, who was incarcerated, sued correctional officers and a registered nurse under a federal civil-rights law, alleging that his constitutional rights were violated at Green Haven Correctional Facility, including during an April 6, 2019 assault.
Because Ruiz was allowed to proceed without paying court fees upfront, the court directed the U.S. Marshals Service to serve Correction Officers P. Link, J. Reyes, and Patrick Squire, and Registered Nurse Deborah MacDonald. The court also directed the New York Attorney General’s Office to identify four unnamed correctional officers and provide their service addresses.
Judge Cathy Seibel ordered Ruiz to file an amended complaint naming the four unnamed officers after receiving their identities, and stated that the amended complaint would later be screened. The court denied fee-free status for any appeal of this order.
The detailed version
- Ruiz v. Link · No. 7:20-cv-00235
- Cathy Seibel
- Feb. 14, 2020
Background
Michael Ruiz, who was incarcerated at the time of the order, brought a case under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal law allowing claims for violations of constitutional rights by people acting under state law. He proceeded without a lawyer and had already been allowed to proceed without paying the filing fee upfront. Ruiz alleges that the defendants violated his constitutional rights while he was incarcerated at Green Haven Correctional Facility, including in connection with an April 6, 2019 assault.
The defendants named in the caption are Correctional Officers P. Link, J. Reyes, and Patrick Squire; Registered Nurse Deborah MacDonald; four unidentified correctional officers identified as John Doe defendants; and an unidentified correctional sergeant identified as John Doe #4.
Service on Named Defendants
Because Ruiz was allowed to proceed without paying the filing fee upfront, the court ruled that he could rely on the court and the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the summons and complaint. The court extended the service deadline until 90 days after the summonses are issued. It stated that, if service is not completed within that period, Ruiz should ask for more time.
The court directed the Clerk of Court to issue summonses, complete the required U.S. Marshals Service forms with the listed addresses, and provide the necessary documents to the Marshals Service for service on Link, Reyes, Squire, and MacDonald.
Identifying the John Doe Defendants
The court found that Ruiz had provided enough information for Green Haven Correctional Facility to identify the four unnamed correctional officers involved in the alleged April 6, 2019 assault. It ordered the New York State Attorney General, described in the order as the attorney and agent for Green Haven Correctional Facility, to identify those officers and provide their service addresses to Ruiz and the court within 60 days.
Within 30 days after receiving that information, Ruiz must file an amended complaint naming the John Doe defendants. The amended complaint will replace, rather than supplement, the original complaint. The court stated that it would screen the amended complaint after it was filed and, if necessary, issue further service instructions.
Other Instructions and Disposition
The court ordered Ruiz to notify the court in writing of any address change and warned that the case could be dismissed if he failed to do so. It directed the Clerk of Court to mail the order and an information package to Ruiz and to send a copy of the order and complaint to the New York State Attorney General.
The court certified that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied Ruiz permission to proceed without paying the appeal fee. The order addressed service and identification of defendants; it did not decide whether Ruiz’s constitutional claims were valid.
Read the full 11-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.