Vann v. Persico

Background

Roosevelt Vann Jr. filed a lawsuit under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, alleging that his employer and union discriminated against him because of his race. The opinion states that Vann was proceeding without a lawyer and that the court had previously granted his request to proceed without paying filing fees.

Service of Process

The order addressed service of process—the formal delivery of the summons and complaint to the defendants. Because Vann was proceeding without paying filing fees, the court explained that he could rely on the court and the U.S. Marshals Service to carry out service.

The court extended the deadline for service until 90 days after the summons was issued. It stated that, if service was not completed within that period, Vann should request an extension of time.

The Clerk of Court was directed to prepare a U.S. Marshals Service Process Receipt and Return form for each listed defendant, issue the summons, and provide the Marshals Service with the paperwork needed to complete service. The listed defendants were Persico, also identified as PCT Contracting; Riggs & Distler; International Local Union #60; Mike Basilone; Carlos Alphonso; and Jay Sergosa.

Other Directive and Effect of the Order

Vann was required to notify the court in writing if his address changed. The order stated that the court could dismiss the action if he failed to do so.

This order concerned filing-fee status and service arrangements. It did not decide the merits of Vann's race-discrimination allegations or state that any defendant was liable.

Disposition

The court directed the Clerk of Court to mail the order and an information package to Vann, prepare the service forms and summonses, and deliver the necessary documents to the Marshals Service. The order was issued by Judge Kenneth M. Karas.