Zeng v. City of New York
- Vyskocil
- 1:20-cv-00451
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Zeng v. City of New York, Judge Vyskocil extended service time, ordered Marshals assistance, stayed dismissal briefing, and denied fee-free appeal status.
Xiamin Zeng, the defendants who had not yet been served, Detective Nicholas Estavillo, Eunice Iwenofu, and the defendants responding to the anticipated motion to dismiss.
What happened
In Zeng v. City of New York, Xiamin Zeng, representing herself, sued under a federal civil-rights law, alleging that the defendants violated her rights. After she filed a second amended complaint, some defendants still had not been served, and counsel was asked to provide addresses for Estavillo and Iwenofu.
The court extended the deadline for serving the newly identified defendants until 90 days after their summonses are issued. It directed the court clerk to prepare the service paperwork and summonses and send the materials to the U.S. Marshals Service. The court also paused briefing on the expected motion to dismiss and ordered the defendants to work with Zeng on a schedule for possibly amending her complaint and responding to any amended complaint.
Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil denied fee-free status for any appeal, finding that an appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith. The order did not decide whether Zeng's civil-rights allegations were legally valid.
The detailed version
- Zeng v. City of New York · No. 1:20-cv-00451
- Vyskocil
- Feb. 1, 2021
Background
Xiamin Zeng, proceeding without a lawyer, brought an action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal law allowing claims for violations of constitutional rights by persons acting under state law. She alleged that the defendants violated her rights. After Zeng filed her Second Amended Complaint, the court issued an earlier service order for certain defendants who had not yet been served and asked defense counsel to identify service addresses for Estavillo and Iwenofu.
Service of Process
Because Zeng was proceeding without a lawyer, the court stated that she was entitled to assistance from the U.S. Marshals Service in serving the complaint. The court extended the time to serve Estavillo and Iwenofu until 90 days after the summons is issued for each newly identified defendant.
The Clerk of Court was instructed to complete a U.S. Marshals Service Process Receipt and Return form for each defendant, issue the summonses, and deliver the necessary paperwork to the Marshals Service so it could attempt service. The order lists service addresses for Detective Nicholas Estavillo and Eunice Iwenofu.
Other Directions and Disposition
Briefing on the defendants' anticipated motion to dismiss was stayed until a later court order. The court ordered the defendant to confer with Zeng and propose a schedule allowing her to amend the complaint using information in the defendants' January 29, 2021 letter and allowing the defendants to respond to any amended complaint.
Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil certified that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal. The order addressed service, scheduling, and appeal status; it did not decide the merits of Zeng's allegations.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.