Bizelia v. Clinton Towers Management
- John Cronan
- 1:20-cv-08065
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Bizelia v. Clinton Towers Management, Judge Cronan authorized service and substituted two defendants in this Fair Housing Act case.
The plaintiffs, who were representing themselves, and the two companies substituted as defendants: Clinton Towers Housing Co., Inc., and P & L Management and Consulting, Inc.
What happened
Bizelia v. Clinton Towers Management involves Jack Bizelia, Hripsime Harutyuyan, and Anahit Matevosyan, who are representing themselves in a Fair Housing Act lawsuit. The court had already allowed them to proceed without paying court fees in advance.
The court directed the Clerk of Court to replace “Clinton Towers Management” with Clinton Towers Housing Co., Inc., and P & L Management and Consulting, Inc., as defendants. It also directed the Clerk and the U.S. Marshals Service to prepare and complete service documents and extended the service deadline to 90 days after the summons is issued.
Judge John P. Cronan issued the order of service on October 28, 2020. The order addressed the defendants and service process; it did not decide the merits of the Fair Housing Act claims.
The detailed version
- Bizelia v. Clinton Towers Management · No. 1:20-cv-08065
- John Cronan
- Oct. 28, 2020
Background
Jack Bizelia, Hripsime Harutyuyan, and Anahit Matevosyan brought the action under the Fair Housing Act, a federal law concerning housing discrimination. They were representing themselves. In an order dated October 26, 2020, the Court granted their requests to proceed without prepaying court fees.
Defendant Substitution
The plaintiffs identified Clinton Towers Housing Co., Inc., and P & L Management and Consulting, Inc., as defendants in their applications to proceed without prepayment of fees, but listed only “Clinton Towers Management” in the complaint. The Court directed the Clerk under Rule 21 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to substitute Clinton Towers Housing Co., Inc., and P & L Management and Consulting, Inc., in place of “Clinton Towers Management.” The Court stated that this amendment was without prejudice to any defenses those defendants might assert.
Service of Process
Because the plaintiffs were allowed to proceed without prepaying fees, the Court determined that they could rely on the Court and the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the defendants. The Court extended the usual deadline for service to 90 days after the summons is issued, explaining that the plaintiffs could not have served the summons and complaint before the Court reviewed the complaint and ordered a summons issued. The Court stated that, if service is not completed within that period, the plaintiffs should request an extension of time.
The Court directed the Clerk to complete a U.S. Marshals Service Process Receipt and Return form for each defendant, issue the summons, and deliver the necessary paperwork to the Marshals Service. The order also required the plaintiffs to notify the Court in writing if their address changes and stated that the action may be dismissed if they fail to do so.
Disposition
The Court directed the Clerk to mail the plaintiffs a copy of the order and an information package. It further instructed the Clerk to substitute the two named companies as defendants and provide the Marshals Service with the documents needed to effect service. This order did not resolve the underlying Fair Housing Act claims.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.