Brown v. Annucci
- Nelson Roman
- 7:19-cv-02296
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 7
In Brown v. Annucci, Judge Roman treated Brown’s second amended complaint as operative and ordered service while correcting the defendant list.
Carl Brown and the defendants named for service in the second amended complaint, including correctional officials and Anthony Annucci.
What happened
Brown v. Annucci concerns Carl Brown’s pro se lawsuit under a federal civil-rights law, alleging constitutional violations related to his incarceration at Green Haven Correctional Facility.
The court had previously dismissed claims against the state corrections department and claims against the remaining defendants because Brown had not alleged their personal involvement. The court allowed him to amend, and this order treated his second amended complaint as the operative complaint.
Judge Nelson S. Roman directed the Clerk to correct the parties, issue summonses, and have the U.S. Marshals Service serve the listed defendants. The order addressed case administration and service; it did not decide whether Brown’s constitutional claims were valid.
The detailed version
- Brown v. Annucci · No. 7:19-cv-02296
- Nelson Roman
- May 18, 2020
Background
Carl Brown, who was incarcerated at Sullivan Correctional Facility, brought this lawsuit without a lawyer under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging constitutional violations arising from his incarceration at Green Haven Correctional Facility. The court had previously allowed Brown to proceed without paying filing fees upfront. It then dismissed his claims against the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision because the Eleventh Amendment barred them, and dismissed claims against the other defendants because Brown had not alleged facts showing their personal involvement. The court allowed Brown to amend his complaint.
Brown filed an amended complaint on August 19, 2019, and another amended complaint on October 21, 2019. The court treated the second amended complaint as the operative complaint—the complaint controlling the case going forward.
Party and Caption Changes
The court directed the Clerk to remove C.O. Jeveri Pitter, C.O. Jeffrey Bonzim, C.O. Tevert Pitters, and C.O. Zikiya Reyes from the case. The order’s footnotes clarify that C.O. Zikiya Reyes-Jordan should not be removed and that Lt. Orazio Bucolo should not be removed. The court also directed the Clerk to change C.O. Steven Purcell’s name to C.O. Steven Purcell, Jr., and to add C. Steven Purcell, Sr.
Service of Process
Because Brown was permitted to proceed without paying filing fees upfront, the court held that he could rely on the court and the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the defendants. The court extended the service deadline to 90 days after the summons is issued, rather than 90 days after the complaint was filed. It stated that Brown should request an extension if service is not completed within that period.
The court directed the Clerk to prepare service forms, issue summonses, and provide the necessary documents to the Marshals Service for service on Thomas Griffin; C.O. Zikiya Reyes-Jordan; Lt. Susan Hann; Superintendent LaManna; Lt. Orazio Bucolo; DSS A. Russo; C.O. Daniel Huttel; C.O. Clifford Gunsett; C.O. Steven Purcell, Jr.; C.O. James Garcia; C.O. Keith Daishawn; C.O. Jeffery Bengim; Dr. Yelena Korobkova; C.O. Fonseca; C.O. Robert Womacsko; Sgt. Dennis Benitez, Jr.; Lt. Byran P. Anspach; C.O. Damon M. Ausman; Craig F. Doyle; C.O. Christina Lorenzo; Captain Bey; Robert Hotaling; Anthony Annucci; and C. Steven Purcell, Sr. The order states that Brown must notify the court in writing if his address changes and that the action may be dismissed if he fails to do so.
Disposition
Judge Nelson S. Roman ordered the Clerk to modify the caption and parties, prepare the service materials, and deliver them to the U.S. Marshals Service. This was an order concerning the operative pleading, party names, and service; the opinion did not reach the merits of Brown’s constitutional claims.
Read the full 7-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.