Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Aug. 28, 2020

Newton v. Bezos

Judge
Ronnie Abrams
Docket
1:20-cv-03993
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
ADA / DisabilityCivil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Newton v. Whole Foods Market, Judge Abrams ordered service of Newton’s disability case and denied permission to appeal without paying fees.

Who this affects

Melissa M. Newton and Whole Foods Market. The order directs the Clerk and the U.S. Marshals Service to serve Whole Foods Market and sets requirements affecting Newton’s lawsuit and any appeal.

What happened

Melissa M. Newton sued Whole Foods Market under the Americans with Disabilities Act and New York State Human Rights Law. She alleges that her employer failed to accommodate her disability and discriminated against her because of it. She is representing herself and had already been allowed to proceed without paying filing fees.

The court ordered the Clerk to issue a summons and provide the U.S. Marshals Service with the documents and defendant information needed to serve Whole Foods Market. Because Newton is proceeding without paying fees, the Marshals Service will carry out service. The court extended the service deadline to 90 days after the summons is issued.

Judge Ronnie Abrams also directed the Clerk to mail Newton the order and an information package. The court warned that the case could be dismissed if Newton does not notify the court of an address change. It denied permission to appeal this order without paying fees, finding that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Newton v. Bezos · No. 1:20-cv-03993
Judge
Ronnie Abrams
Date
Aug. 28, 2020

Background

Melissa M. Newton brought this case under the Americans with Disabilities Act and the New York State Human Rights Law. She alleges that her employer failed to accommodate her disability and discriminated against her based on that disability. The opinion identifies Newton as representing herself. A prior order had allowed her to proceed without paying filing fees.

Service of the lawsuit

Because Newton was allowed to proceed without paying fees, the court explained that she could rely on the court and the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the defendant. The court directed the Clerk of Court to complete a U.S. Marshals Service Process Receipt and Return form, issue a summons, and provide the Marshals Service with the documents needed to serve Whole Foods Market.

The usual deadline under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) is 90 days after the complaint is filed. The court extended Newton’s deadline to 90 days after the summons is issued because she could not have served the summons and complaint before the court reviewed the complaint and ordered the summons issued. The court stated that Newton should request an extension if the complaint is not served within that period.

Other directions and disposition

The court directed the Clerk to mail Newton a copy of the order and an information package. It also stated that Newton must notify the court in writing if her address changes and that the case may be dismissed if she fails to do so.

The court certified that an appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith and denied Newton permission to appeal without paying fees. This order addressed service and appeal-related fee status; it did not decide whether Newton’s disability-discrimination allegations were legally or factually valid.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.