Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Nov. 24, 2020

Felton v. Commissioner of Social Security

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:20-cv-09076
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
Civil ProcedureSocial Security
In one sentence

In Felton v. Commissioner of Social Security, Magistrate Judge Sarah L. Cave ordered the Marshals Service to serve the defendant.

Who this affects

LaQuinta Felton, the Clerk of Court, the U.S. Marshals Service, and the Commissioner of Social Security were affected. The order required the Clerk and Marshals Service to arrange service and imposed service-related obligations on Felton.

What happened

LaQuinta Felton challenged the denial of her Social Security benefits and received permission to proceed without paying court fees in advance. Because she was proceeding under that permission, she could rely on the court and the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the Commissioner of Social Security.

The court extended the service deadline to 90 days after the summons is issued. It instructed the Clerk of Court to prepare the service form, issue the summons, and send the necessary documents to the Marshals Service. The court also said Felton must report any address change and that the case could be dismissed if she failed to do so.

Magistrate Judge Sarah L. Cave entered this service order on November 24, 2020. The order addressed service of the lawsuit and did not decide whether Felton was entitled to Social Security benefits.

The detailed version

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

Case
Felton v. Commissioner of Social Security · No. 1:20-cv-09076
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
Nov. 24, 2020

Background

LaQuinta Felton brought this action challenging the denial of her Social Security benefits. An earlier order granted her permission to proceed without prepaying court fees. The opinion identifies Sarah L. Cave as the United States Magistrate Judge.

Service of process

Because Felton was allowed to proceed without prepaying fees, federal law required the court to arrange service through the U.S. Marshals Service. The court explained that Felton could not have served the summons and complaint before the court reviewed the complaint and ordered that a summons be issued. It therefore extended the service period to 90 days after the summons date.

The court stated that Felton should request an extension if service was not completed within that period. It instructed the Clerk of Court to complete a U.S. Marshals Service Process Receipt and Return form, issue a summons, and deliver the necessary documents to the Marshals Service for service on the Commissioner of Social Security at the address listed in the order. Felton was also required to notify the court in writing of any address change; the court stated that it might dismiss the action if she failed to do so.

Disposition

The court entered an order for service. It did not decide the merits of Felton’s challenge to the denial of benefits.

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.