Roundtree v. San Jose
- Jesse Furman
- 1:19-cv-02475-JMF-JW
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Roundtree v. NYC, Judge Furman dismissed claims against Medical Administrator Roberts and the Doe defendants without prejudice for failure to serve them.
Medical Administrator Roberts and all Jane and John Doe defendants were dismissed from the case without prejudice; Roundtree was denied permission to appeal without prepaying filing fees.
What happened
Juel Roundtree v. NYC, et al. concerned Roundtree’s claims against Medical Administrator Roberts and unidentified Jane and John Doe defendants. The opinion states that the complaint was filed on November 27, 2019, but there was no proof that these defendants had been served by April 28, 2021.
The court ordered Roundtree, who was proceeding without a lawyer, to explain in writing why the claims should not be dismissed for failure to serve the defendants within the required time. Roundtree did not respond to that order.
Judge Jesse M. Furman dismissed the complaint without prejudice as to Medical Administrator Roberts and all Jane and John Doe defendants under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m). The clerk was directed to remove those defendants as parties, and the court denied permission to appeal without paying filing fees.
The detailed version
- Roundtree v. San Jose · No. 1:19-cv-02475-JMF-JW
- Jesse Furman
- July 1, 2021
Background
The operative complaint was filed on November 27, 2019. The court stated that, as of April 28, 2021, the docket contained no proof of service for Medical Administrator Roberts or the defendants identified as Jane and John Doe. Roundtree was proceeding without counsel.
Order to Show Cause
On April 28, 2021, the court ordered Roundtree to show in writing by May 18, 2021, why the claims against Roberts and the Jane and John Doe defendants should not be dismissed for failure to serve them within the period required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m). The opinion states that Roundtree did not respond.
Ruling
Under Rule 4(m), the court dismissed the complaint without prejudice as to Medical Administrator Roberts and all Jane and John Doe defendants. The clerk was directed to terminate those defendants as parties and mail Roundtree a copy of the order.
The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith. It therefore denied permission to appeal without prepaying the appellate filing fees. The opinion addresses service and the failure to respond; it does not decide the underlying merits of Roundtree’s claims.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.