Avent v. Estevez
- Andrew Carter
- 1:20-cv-01197
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Avent v. Estevez, Judge Carter ordered service through Marshals, extended the service deadline, and required clarification about an unidentified parole officer.
Reuben F. Avent, Sunny Koshy, the unidentified Senior Parole Officer, the Clerk of Court, and the U.S. Marshals Service.
What happened
Reuben F. Avent, who was representing himself, sued Parole Officer L. Estevez and others while on post-release supervision. The court had already allowed him to proceed without paying filing fees.
Because Avent could not serve the defendants before the court reviewed his complaint and issued summonses, the court extended the service deadline to 90 days after the summonses are issued. It also directed the Clerk and U.S. Marshals Service to serve Sunny Koshy and directed Avent to clarify whether Vanessa Guerrero was the unidentified Senior Parole Officer he intended to sue.
Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr. ordered the Clerk to mail the order to Avent, complete the service forms, and provide the necessary papers to the Marshals Service. The order also states that the court substituted the Unknown Parole Director for Sunny Koshy.
The detailed version
- Avent v. Estevez · No. 1:20-cv-01197
- Andrew Carter
- Dec. 15, 2020
Background
Reuben F. Avent brought the action while on post-release supervision pursuant to a 2009 resentencing on a 2001 Rockland County conviction. The opinion states that Avent was proceeding without a lawyer and had been permitted to proceed without prepaying filing fees.
Service of process
Because Avent was proceeding without prepaying fees, the court explained that he could rely on the court and the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the defendants. The court extended the usual 90-day service period to 90 days after the summons is issued, reasoning that Avent could not serve the summons and complaint before the court reviewed the complaint and ordered issuance of a summons. The court stated that Avent should request an extension if service was not completed within that period.
The court directed the Clerk of Court to complete a U.S. Marshals Service Process Receipt and Return form for Sunny Koshy, issue a summons, and provide the Marshals Service with the paperwork needed to serve Koshy at the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision Manhattan II Area Office, 314 West 40th Street, New York, New York 10018.
Unknown Senior Parole Officer
The Office of the Attorney General informed the court that Senior Parole Officer Tucker had not interacted or communicated with Avent. It believed Avent intended to name Vanessa Guerrero, identified in the opinion as a Senior Parole Officer at the Manhattan II Area Office during the period alleged in the complaint. The court directed Avent to notify the court by January 15, 2021 if he believed Guerrero was not the intended defendant. If he did not intend to sue Guerrero, the court directed him to provide more detailed identifying information about the Senior Parole Officer he intended to sue.
Disposition
The court directed the Clerk to mail Avent a copy of the order and note service on the docket. It also directed the Clerk to complete the service forms for Koshy and deliver the necessary documents to the Marshals Service. The conclusion states: “The Court substitutes Defendant Unknown Parole Director for Defendant Sunny Koshy, Bureau Chief of the Manhattan II Area Office.” The opinion is an order concerning service and identification of defendants; it does not decide the underlying claims.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.