Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 15, 2021

Amigon v. Luzon

Judge
Philip Halpern
Docket
7:21-cv-02029
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil RightsSection 1983Pro SeCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Amigon v. Luzon, Judge Halpern ordered service of the complaint and identification of an unnamed supervising officer.

Who this affects

Anthony Xavier Amigon, Defendant Dylan J. Luzon, the unidentified supervising officer, and the Village of Dobbs Ferry.

What happened

In Amigon v. Luzon, Anthony Xavier Amigon, representing himself, brought civil-rights claims under federal law against members of the Dobbs Ferry Police Department over a traffic stop.

The court ordered the Clerk to issue a summons for Dylan J. Luzon and directed Amigon to serve him within 90 days. It also ordered the Village of Dobbs Ferry to identify the unnamed supervising officer involved in the stop, detention, and arrest, after which Amigon must file an amended complaint naming that officer.

Judge Philip M. Halpern issued this order of service. The order did not decide whether Amigon’s claims were legally valid; it addressed service and identifying a defendant.

The detailed version

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

Case
Amigon v. Luzon · No. 7:21-cv-02029
Judge
Philip Halpern
Date
Mar. 15, 2021

Background

Anthony Xavier Amigon is proceeding without a lawyer and paid the filing fees to begin the action. He asserts claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal civil-rights law, alleging that members of the Dobbs Ferry Police Department violated his rights during a traffic stop.

Service on Dylan J. Luzon

The court directed the Clerk of Court to issue a summons for Defendant Dylan J. Luzon. Amigon must serve Luzon with the summons and complaint within 90 days after the summons is issued. If Amigon neither serves Luzon nor requests more time within that period, the court stated that it may dismiss the claims against Luzon under Rules 4 and 41 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for failure to prosecute.

Identifying the John Doe Defendant

The complaint refers to an unidentified supervising officer. Applying the rule that a self-represented litigant is entitled to the district court’s assistance in identifying a defendant, the court found that Amigon provided enough information for the Dobbs Ferry Police Department to identify the officer involved in the traffic stop and Amigon’s detention and arrest on March 7, 2020.

The court ordered the Village of Dobbs Ferry, identified as the municipal entity responsible for the Dobbs Ferry Police Department, to determine the officer’s identity, badge number, and service address. The Village must provide that information to Amigon and the court within 60 days of the order. Within 30 days after receiving the information, Amigon must file an amended complaint naming the John Doe defendant. The amended complaint will replace, rather than supplement, the original complaint. The court will then screen the amended complaint and may direct the Clerk to issue a summons for service on the newly named defendant.

Other Directives and Disposition

The court directed the Clerk to mail the order and an information package to Amigon and to mail the order and complaint to the Village of Dobbs Ferry. It also directed the Clerk to issue a summons for service on Luzon. Judge Philip M. Halpern entered the order as an order of service. The opinion does not decide the merits of Amigon’s civil-rights claims.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.