Johnson v. Department of Corrections
- Vincent Briccetti
- 7:21-cv-00986
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Chad S. Johnson v. Warden of Downstate Correctional Facility, Judge Briccetti identified one defendant and ordered more information about another.
Chad S. Johnson, Edward Burnett, the unidentified Warden of Downstate Correctional Facility, the remaining unnamed defendants, the New York State Attorney General’s Office, the court clerk, and the U.S. Marshals Service.
What happened
Chad S. Johnson v. Warden of Downstate Correctional Facility concerns Johnson’s constitutional-rights claims under a federal civil-rights law. He represented himself and was allowed to proceed without paying filing fees. The court had previously directed New York’s Attorney General to identify several unnamed defendants.
The Attorney General identified Edward Burnett as the likely identity of the “Deputy of Security” but could not identify the “Warden of Downstate Correctional Facility.” The court directed Johnson to provide additional identifying information about that warden and told him not to file an amended complaint yet.
Judge Vincent L. Briccetti ordered the clerk to replace “Deputy of Security” with Edward Burnett, prepare service paperwork, and send it to the U.S. Marshals Service. The court extended the Attorney General’s deadline to identify the remaining unnamed defendants to May 31, 2021, and denied fee-waiver status for any appeal from this order.
The detailed version
- Johnson v. Department of Corrections · No. 7:21-cv-00986
- Vincent Briccetti
- Apr. 27, 2021
Background
Chad S. Johnson, representing himself and proceeding without paying filing fees, brought claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging violations of his constitutional rights. The case names the Warden of Downstate Correctional Facility, Edward Burnett, Sergeants Petrie, Lieutenant Kailvetti, Officer D. Allen, and six unnamed defendants.
On March 17, 2021, the court ordered the New York State Attorney General’s Office to determine the identities and addresses of several unnamed defendants. Johnson was required to file an amended complaint naming those defendants within 30 days after receiving the information.
The Attorney General reported that the most likely identity of the “Deputy of Security” was Edward Burnett, who was identified as the Superintendent of Fishkill Correctional Facility and could be served at the address attached to the order. The Attorney General could not identify the “Warden of Downstate Correctional Facility.”
Court’s Orders
The court directed Johnson to send a letter to the court and the Attorney General by May 17, 2021, providing any additional information he had about the warden’s identity. The requested information was to include details about when the alleged failures to supervise staff occurred.
The clerk was directed to remove “Deputy of Security” from the docket and add “Edward Burnett, Deputy of Security.” The clerk was also directed to complete the U.S. Marshals Service process form, issue a summons for Burnett, and provide the Marshals Service with the paperwork needed to serve him.
The court instructed Johnson not to file an amended complaint yet because the Attorney General was continuing to identify other defendants. The court extended the Attorney General’s deadline to comply with the March 17 order from May 17 to May 31, 2021. Johnson remained responsible for ensuring service within 90 days after the summons was issued and for notifying the court of any address change.
Disposition
Judge Vincent L. Briccetti entered an amended order of service. The order directed Johnson to provide more information about the unidentified warden, directed the clerk to add Edward Burnett as a defendant and arrange service, and extended the identification deadline for the remaining unnamed defendants. The court also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Johnson permission to proceed without paying fees for purposes of an appeal from this order. The order did not decide the merits of Johnson’s constitutional-rights claims.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.