Brown v. New York City Department of Education
- Valerie Caproni
- 1:20-cv-02424
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Brown v. New York City Department of Education, Judge Caproni ordered United States Marshals service for Brown’s amended employment-discrimination complaint.
Mary Brown, who was permitted to rely on the court and the United States Marshals Service for service, and the New York City Department of Education, which was to be served with the amended complaint.
What happened
Brown v. New York City Department of Education concerns Mary Brown’s claims that the defendant discriminated against her because of her age and disability under federal, New York State, and New York City laws. Brown filed the case without a lawyer and later submitted an amended complaint.
Earlier court-ordered service was not completed. Because Brown had been allowed to proceed under the court’s fee-waiver process, the court said she could rely on the court and the United States Marshals Service to serve the defendant.
Judge Valerie Caproni ordered the Clerk of Court to prepare the service paperwork, issue a summons, and provide the necessary documents to the Marshals Service. The court extended the service deadline to 90 days after the summons is issued for the amended complaint; it did not decide whether Brown’s discrimination claims were valid.
The detailed version
- Brown v. New York City Department of Education · No. 1:20-cv-02424
- Valerie Caproni
- Aug. 14, 2020
Background
Mary Brown filed this pro se case, meaning she was representing herself, against the New York City Department of Education. She alleged age and disability discrimination under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and New York State and New York City Human Rights Laws. The court had previously granted her request to proceed in forma pauperis, or under the court’s process for litigants who are permitted to proceed without paying the ordinary filing costs at the outset.
The court had issued an earlier service order, but service was never completed. Brown filed an amended complaint on August 11, 2020.
Service ruling
The court explained that a person allowed to proceed under this process may rely on the court and the United States Marshals Service to serve the defendant. Although the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure generally require service within 90 days after a complaint is filed, the court said Brown could not have served the amended complaint until the court reviewed it and ordered a summons issued.
The court therefore extended the time for service until 90 days after the summons for the amended complaint is issued. It stated that Brown should request more time if the amended complaint is not served within that period.
The Clerk of Court was instructed to complete a United States Marshals Service Process Receipt and Return form for the New York City Department of Education, issue a summons, and deliver the necessary paperwork to the Marshals Service. Brown was also required to notify the court in writing if her address changes, and the court stated that the action could be dismissed if she failed to do so.
Result and scope
Judge Valerie Caproni’s order addressed service of process—the formal delivery of the lawsuit and summons to the defendant. It did not decide the merits of Brown’s age- or disability-discrimination claims. The order directed the Clerk of Court and the Marshals Service to take steps to serve the amended complaint on the New York City Department of Education.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.