Bonie v. Annucci
- Kenneth Karas
- 7:20-cv-00640
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Bonie v. Annucci, Judge Karas ordered service and discovery procedures in a prisoner’s civil-rights case and denied permission to appeal without paying filing fees.
NASEAN BONIE, the incarcerated plaintiff, received court-directed assistance with serving the defendants and was subject to the requirement to keep the court informed of address changes. Anthony Annucci, Superintendent Royce, and Ileshema Thomas were to be served and required to respond to the standard discovery requests. Bonie was denied permission to appeal this order without paying filing fees.
What happened
In Bonie v. Annucci, NASEAN BONIE, who is incarcerated, sued Anthony Annucci, Superintendent Royce, and Ileshema Thomas under a federal civil-rights law, claiming that they were violating his constitutional rights. The court had already allowed him to proceed without paying court fees upfront.
The court directed the Clerk and the U.S. Marshals Service to prepare and serve the lawsuit on the defendants. It extended the service deadline to 90 days after the summonses are issued and told Bonie to ask for more time if service is not completed. The court also ruled that a local rule requiring standard discovery responses applies, and ordered the defendants to respond within 120 days after receiving the complaint.
Judge Kenneth M. Karas ordered that a copy of the order and an information package be mailed to Bonie. He also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without paying filing fees. The order did not decide whether Bonie’s constitutional-rights claims were valid.
The detailed version
- Bonie v. Annucci · No. 7:20-cv-00640
- Kenneth Karas
- Feb. 19, 2020
Background
NASEAN BONIE, who was incarcerated at Green Haven Correctional Facility, brought a civil-rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Anthony Annucci, Superintendent Royce, and Ileshema Thomas, also identified as Mimi/Officer Thomas. Bonie alleged that the defendants were violating his constitutional rights. The court had previously granted Bonie permission to proceed without paying court fees upfront. The order notes that prisoners must still pay the full filing fee over time even when they receive that permission.
Service of the Lawsuit
Because Bonie was allowed to proceed without paying fees upfront, the court stated that he could rely on the court and the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the defendants. The court extended the deadline for service to 90 days after the summonses are issued. If the complaint is not served within that period, Bonie was told to request an extension of time.
The court directed the Clerk to complete a U.S. Marshals Service Process Receipt and Return form for each defendant, issue summonses, and provide the Marshals Service with the documents needed to serve Anthony Annucci, Superintendent Royce, and Ileshema Thomas, also identified as Mimi/Officer Thomas. Bonie was required to notify the court in writing of any address change, and the court stated that the action could be dismissed if he failed to do so.
Discovery
The court ruled that Local Civil Rule 33.2 applies to the action. That rule requires defendants in certain prisoner cases to respond to specified court-ordered questions and document requests. The defendants must serve their responses within 120 days after service of the complaint and must quote each request word for word in their responses. The court stated that Bonie could request copies of the discovery materials from the Pro Se Intake Unit if he could not access them online.
Disposition
The Clerk was directed to mail Bonie a copy of the order and an information package, complete the service forms, and deliver the required documents to the U.S. Marshals Service. The court ruled that Local Civil Rule 33.2 applies. It also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without paying fees for purposes of an appeal. The order addressed service, discovery, and appeal-fee status; it did not resolve the merits of Bonie’s constitutional-rights claims.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.