Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Dec. 22, 2021

Stevenson v. Carter

Judge
Ronnie Abrams
Docket
1:21-cv-09041
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
7
Civil RightsSection 1983Pro SeCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Stevenson v. Carter, Judge Abrams ordered service efforts and identification of a John Doe defendant in Stevenson’s constitutional-rights lawsuit.

Who this affects

William Stevenson, the three identified defendants asked to waive service, the unnamed John Doe defendant, and the New York City Department of Correction and Law Department.

What happened

Stevenson v. Carter is a lawsuit by William Stevenson, who is representing himself, under a federal civil-rights law. He alleges that officials violated his constitutional rights while he was detained at the Vernon C. Bain Center. The court had previously allowed him to proceed without paying the filing fee upfront.

The court asked C. Carter, Captain Horton, and Captain Guerra to waive formal service of the lawsuit. It also ordered the New York City Law Department to identify the unnamed “John Doe” captain, provide his badge number and service address, and give that information to Stevenson and the court within 60 days.

After receiving that information, Stevenson must file an amended complaint naming the John Doe defendant within 30 days. The amended complaint will replace the original complaint, and the court will screen it. Judge Abrams’s order addressed service and identification of a defendant; it did not decide whether Stevenson’s constitutional claims were valid.

The detailed version

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

Case
Stevenson v. Carter · No. 1:21-cv-09041
Judge
Ronnie Abrams
Date
Dec. 22, 2021

Background

William Stevenson, who is detained at the Anna M. Kross Center on Rikers Island, brought this action without a lawyer under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He alleges that the defendants violated his constitutional rights while he was detained at the Vernon C. Bain Center. The defendants listed in the caption are Warden Carter, Captain Guerra, Captain John Doe, and Captain Horton. The court had previously granted Stevenson permission to proceed without paying the filing fee at the start of the case, although the order notes that prisoners remain responsible for the full filing fee under federal law.

Service of the Named Defendants

The court directed the Clerk of Court to notify the New York City Department of Correction and the New York City Law Department about the order. The court requested that C. Carter, identified in the order as the Vernon C. Bain Center warden; Captain Horton, identified as the facility storehouse captain; and Captain Guerra, identified as the 3-AA shift supervisor, waive service of summons.

Identification of the John Doe Defendant

Because Stevenson provided enough information to allow the Department of Correction to identify the unnamed Vernon C. Bain Center facility shift supervising captain, the court ordered the New York City Law Department to determine that person’s identity, badge number, and address for service. The Law Department must provide that information to Stevenson and the court within 60 days of the order. The order also addresses how service information should be provided depending on whether the John Doe defendant is a current or former Department of Correction employee or official.

Within 30 days after receiving the identification information, Stevenson must file an amended complaint naming the John Doe defendant. The amended complaint will replace, rather than supplement, the original complaint. The court stated that it will screen the amended complaint and, if necessary, issue another order concerning service.

Disposition

The order directed the clerk to notify the relevant city agencies, requested waiver of service for the three identified defendants, required the Law Department to identify the John Doe defendant, and required Stevenson to file an amended complaint after receiving that information. The order did not decide the merits of Stevenson’s constitutional-rights allegations.

The authoritative version

Read the full 7-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.