Levinson v. Federal Bureau of Prisons Metropolitan Corrections Center-NY Warden
- Valerie Caproni
- 1:20-cv-07375
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Levinson v. Federal Bureau of Prisons Metropolitan Corrections Center-NY Warden, Judge Caproni ordered U.S. Marshals service and extended the service deadline.
Nikolay Levinson and the United States, the Federal Bureau of Prisons, the Metropolitan Corrections Center–New York, Mandeep Singh, Yoon Kang, and Correctional Officer Torres.
What happened
In Levinson v. Federal Bureau of Prisons Metropolitan Corrections Center-NY Warden, Nikolay Levinson, who was representing himself, paid the fees to bring the case. The court had interpreted his amended complaint as naming the United States, the Federal Bureau of Prisons, the Metropolitan Corrections Center–New York, Mandeep Singh, Yoon Kang, and Correctional Officer Torres as defendants.
A private process server could not serve the defendants because the Metropolitan Corrections Center does not allow non-law-enforcement personnel to serve papers on its premises. The court therefore found that service by the U.S. Marshals Service was appropriate and extended the service deadline to 90 days after the order.
Judge Valerie Caproni directed the Clerk of Court to prepare the required forms, issue summonses, and provide the paperwork to the Marshals Service. The order also required Levinson to notify the court of any address change and warned that the case could be dismissed if he failed to do so. The order addressed service procedures and did not decide the claims' merits.
The detailed version
- Levinson v. Federal Bureau of Prisons Metropolitan Corrections Center-NY Warden · No. 1:20-cv-07375
- Valerie Caproni
- Jan. 29, 2021
Background
Nikolay Levinson filed an amended complaint and paid the fees required to start the action. The Court had interpreted the amended complaint as naming the United States of America, the Federal Bureau of Prisons, the Metropolitan Corrections Center–New York, Mandeep Singh, Yoon Kang, and Correctional Officer Torres as defendants. The Court had previously ordered that summonses be issued and that Levinson serve the defendants.
Service of Process
Levinson attempted service through a private process server, but that attempt was unsuccessful because the Metropolitan Corrections Center does not permit non-law-enforcement personnel to serve papers on its premises. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(c)(3) permits the Court, at a plaintiff's request, to order service by a United States marshal, deputy marshal, or specially appointed person. The Court found that service by the U.S. Marshals Service was appropriate.
Rule 4(m) generally requires service within 90 days after the complaint is filed. Because Levinson had made good-faith efforts to serve the defendants and had to wait for the Court to review his amended complaint and order issuance of summonses, the Court extended the service period to 90 days after the date of this order. The Court stated that, if service was not completed within that period, Levinson should request an extension of time.
Order
Judge Valerie Caproni directed the Clerk of Court to complete a U.S. Marshals Service Process Receipt and Return form for each defendant. The Clerk was also directed to issue the summonses and provide the Marshals Service with the paperwork needed to serve the defendants. Levinson was required to notify the Court in writing if his address changed, and the Court stated that it could dismiss the action if he failed to do so. The Clerk was directed to mail Levinson a copy of the order and an information package.
Effect of the Order
This was an order concerning service of process—the formal delivery of the lawsuit papers to the defendants. It did not resolve the underlying claims or decide whether any defendant was legally responsible.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.