Gunn v. Ayala
- Kenneth Karas
- 7:20-cv-00840
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Gunn v. Ayala, Judge Karas ordered service of Gunn’s federal civil-rights complaint and related prisoner-case procedures, without deciding the constitutional claims.
Darrell Gunn, the incarcerated plaintiff proceeding without a lawyer, and Correction Officer Edwin Ayala, who must be served and respond to the specified prisoner-case discovery requests.
What happened
In Gunn v. Ayala, Darrell Gunn, who was incarcerated at Sing Sing Correctional Facility, brought a lawsuit without a lawyer under federal civil-rights law against Correction Officer Edwin Ayala. Gunn alleged that Ayala violated his constitutional rights; the opinion does not describe the underlying events or claims in detail.
Because Gunn had permission to proceed without paying court fees, the court said the U.S. Marshals Service would serve Ayala. The court extended the service deadline to 90 days after the summons is issued, directed the Clerk of Court to prepare the summons and service paperwork, and required Ayala to respond to standard prisoner-case discovery requests within 120 days after service.
Judge Kenneth M. Karas issued an order of service, instructed the Clerk to mail the order to Gunn and update the case caption with Ayala’s first name, and warned that the case could be dismissed if Gunn failed to report an address change. The order did not decide whether Ayala violated Gunn’s constitutional rights.
The detailed version
- Gunn v. Ayala · No. 7:20-cv-00840
- Kenneth Karas
- Jan. 4, 2021
Background
Darrell Gunn, who was incarcerated at Sing Sing Correctional Facility, filed this lawsuit without a lawyer under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal law that allows claims for constitutional violations by government officials. The defendant is Correction Officer Edwin Ayala. The opinion states that the events underlying the claim occurred while Gunn was incarcerated at Green Haven Correctional Facility, but it does not describe the alleged constitutional violation.
The court had previously granted Gunn permission to proceed without prepaying court fees. In such cases, the court and the U.S. Marshals Service handle service of the summons and complaint. The New York State Office of the Attorney General had provided Ayala’s first name and service address.
Service of the Complaint
The court explained that the usual 90-day deadline for serving a summons and complaint could not begin to operate normally because Gunn could not serve the papers himself before the court reviewed the complaint and ordered a summons. The court therefore extended the service period until 90 days after the summons is issued. If service is not completed within that period, Gunn must request more time.
The Clerk of Court was directed to issue a summons, complete a U.S. Marshals Service Process Receipt and Return form for Ayala, and deliver the necessary documents to the Marshals Service. The court also directed the Clerk to add Ayala’s first name to the caption. Gunn must notify the court in writing if his address changes; the court stated that it may dismiss the case if he fails to do so.
Discovery
The court stated that Local Civil Rule 33.2 applies. That rule requires defendants in certain prisoner cases to respond to specified court-ordered discovery requests. The defendants must serve responses to those standard interrogatories and document requests within 120 days after service of the complaint and must quote each request verbatim in their responses.
Ruling
Judge Kenneth M. Karas ordered the Clerk to mail the order to Gunn, issue the summons, prepare the service form, and provide the documents to the U.S. Marshals Service for service on Ayala. The order also established the service deadline and the discovery-response requirement. It did not reach the merits of Gunn’s constitutional claims.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.