Clark v. New York City Housing Authority
- Paul Engelmayer
- 1:20-cv-00251
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Clark v. New York City Housing Authority, Judge Engelmayer ordered the U.S. Marshals Service to serve Clark’s defendants.
La’Shaun Clark, the four named defendants, the Clerk of Court, and the U.S. Marshals Service were affected by the service instructions. The order did not decide whether Clark’s asbestos-related allegations were legally valid.
What happened
Clark v. New York City Housing Authority concerns La’Shaun Clark’s pro se lawsuit alleging health effects from asbestos exposure in a New York City Housing Authority apartment. Clark brought the case under diversity jurisdiction and was allowed to proceed without paying court fees in advance.
Because Clark was proceeding without paying fees, the court directed the Clerk of Court and the U.S. Marshals Service to handle service of the summons and complaint. The court extended the service deadline until 90 days after the summons is issued.
Judge Paul A. Engelmayer ordered the Clerk to prepare service forms, issue the summons, and provide the Marshals Service with the documents and addresses needed to serve the defendants. The order also required Clark to notify the court of any address change and warned that the case could be dismissed if he failed to do so.
The detailed version
- Clark v. New York City Housing Authority · No. 1:20-cv-00251
- Paul Engelmayer
- Jan. 27, 2020
Background
La’Shaun Clark, appearing without a lawyer, brought this action under the court’s diversity jurisdiction. He alleged that he suffered adverse health effects after exposure to asbestos in an apartment operated by the New York City Housing Authority in the Bronx. The caption names New York City Housing Authority; New York Insulation & Environmental Services, Inc.; JLC Environmental Consultants, Inc.; and Rockmills Steel Products Corp. as defendants.
The court had previously granted Clark permission to proceed without prepaying filing fees. In such cases, federal law and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure require the court to order service by the U.S. Marshals Service when appropriate.
Service of the lawsuit
The court explained that the usual rule generally requires service within 90 days after a complaint is filed. Because Clark could not serve the defendants until the court reviewed the complaint and ordered a summons issued, the court extended the service period to 90 days after the summons is issued. The court stated that, if service is not completed within that period, Clark should request an extension.
The court directed the Clerk of Court to prepare a U.S. Marshals Service Process Receipt and Return form for each defendant, issue the summons, and deliver the necessary paperwork to the Marshals Service. The Clerk was also directed to complete the forms with the defendants’ service addresses and provide all documents needed for service.
Order
Judge Paul A. Engelmayer ordered the Clerk to mail Clark a copy of the order and an information package and to arrange for service through the Marshals Service. The order also required Clark to notify the court in writing if his address changes and stated that the action may be dismissed if he fails to do so.
The opinion contains apparent naming inconsistencies: the body refers to “JUC Environmental Consultants, Inc.” while the caption and service list refer to “JLC Environmental Consultants, Inc.”; the caption and body refer to “Rockmills Steel Products Corp.,” while the service-address list refers to “Rockmill Steel Products, Inc.”
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.