Ritter v. Montoya
- John Koeltl
- 1:20-cv-00114
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 5
In Ritter v. Montoya, Judge Koeltl ordered service of the complaint and identification of unnamed defendants without deciding the constitutional claims.
Gregory Ritter, Officer Montoya, Nurse Stiles, the two unnamed defendants, the Clerk of Court, the U.S. Marshals Service, and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York.
What happened
In Ritter v. Montoya, Gregory Ritter, who was representing himself, brought a civil-rights lawsuit under Section 1983 over alleged constitutional violations during his incarceration at the Metropolitan Correctional Center in Manhattan. The court had already allowed him to proceed without paying fees upfront.
The court directed the Clerk and U.S. Marshals Service to serve Officer Montoya and Nurse Stiles, and extended the service deadline until 90 days after summonses were issued. It also ordered the U.S. Attorney’s Office to identify two unnamed defendants: a correction officer and the doctor of record at the facility. Ritter must file an amended complaint naming them within 30 days after receiving that information.
Judge John G. Koeltl entered an order of service on February 21, 2020. The order did not decide whether the alleged constitutional violations occurred, and it denied fee-waiver status for any appeal from the order.
The detailed version
- Ritter v. Montoya · No. 1:20-cv-00114
- John Koeltl
- Feb. 21, 2020
Background
Gregory Ritter, proceeding without a lawyer, brought this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that Officer Montoya, Officer Doe, Nurse Stiles, and the doctor of record at the Metropolitan Correctional Center in Manhattan violated his federal constitutional rights while he was incarcerated there. The opinion states that Ritter was then incarcerated at the Metropolitan Correctional Center in Chicago, Illinois. The court had previously allowed him to proceed without paying fees upfront.
Service on Named Defendants
Because Ritter was allowed to proceed without paying fees upfront, the court explained that he could rely on the court and the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the complaint. The court extended the service deadline until 90 days after the summonses were issued, rather than counting from the filing of the complaint.
The Clerk of Court was directed to complete service forms for Officer Montoya and Nurse Stiles, mark them for service on the United States, issue summonses, and provide the necessary paperwork to the U.S. Marshals Service. Ritter was also required to notify the court in writing if his address changed; the court stated that the action could be dismissed if he failed to do so.
Unnamed Defendants
The court found that Ritter had provided enough information for the Bureau of Prisons to identify two unnamed defendants: the correction officer who worked with Officer Montoya at the facility on or around December 29, 2018, and the doctor of record who treated Ritter there around that date.
The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York was ordered to provide the identities and service addresses to Ritter and the court within 60 days. Within 30 days after receiving that information, Ritter must file an amended complaint naming the unnamed defendants. The amended complaint will replace, rather than supplement, the original complaint. The court stated that it would screen the amended complaint and, if necessary, direct service on the newly identified defendants.
Disposition
Judge John G. Koeltl entered an order directing service and identification of unnamed defendants. The opinion does not decide the merits of Ritter’s constitutional claims. The court certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without paying fees for purposes of an appeal from this order.
Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.