Davis v. Sedgwick Claims Management Services
- Paul Gardephe
- 1:21-cv-07090
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Davis v. Sedgwick Management Claims Service, Judge Gardephe ordered Marshals service and extended the service deadline, while denying appeal fee-free status.
Laura Davis and Sedgwick Management Claims Service; the order also directs the Clerk of Court and the U.S. Marshals Service to carry out service.
What happened
Davis v. Sedgwick Management Claims Service concerns Laura Davis’s claims under federal and state laws arising from her former employment with Delta Airlines. Davis is proceeding without a lawyer and was allowed to proceed without paying court fees in advance.
The court directed the Clerk of Court to issue a summons, complete the required service form, and send the necessary papers to the U.S. Marshals Service. It extended the deadline for service until 90 days after the summons is issued and instructed Davis to request more time if service is not completed by then.
Judge Paul G. Gardephe also ordered Davis to notify the court of any address change and denied fee-free status for any appeal from this order, certifying that such an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Davis v. Sedgwick Claims Management Services · No. 1:21-cv-07090
- Paul Gardephe
- Feb. 10, 2022
Background
Laura Davis, appearing without a lawyer, brought claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1981, the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, the federal racketeering statute, and state-law claims for defamation and fraud. The opinion states that the claims arise from her former employment with Delta Airlines. The court had previously allowed Davis to proceed without paying court fees in advance, a status commonly called proceeding in forma pauperis.
Service of Process
Because Davis was allowed to proceed without prepaying fees, the court stated that she could rely on the court and the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the defendant. The court extended the ordinary 90-day service period until 90 days after the summons is issued, explaining that Davis could not have served the summons and second amended complaint before the court reviewed that complaint and ordered a summons issued. The court stated that Davis should request an extension if service is not completed within that period.
The Clerk of Court was instructed to complete a U.S. Marshals Service Process Receipt and Return form with the address for Sedgwick Management Claims Service, issue a summons, and provide the Marshals Service with the documents needed to serve the defendant. Davis was also instructed to notify the court in writing if her address changes; the court stated that the action may be dismissed if she fails to do so.
Disposition
The court ordered the Clerk to issue the summons and arrange for service through the U.S. Marshals Service. It also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal. The order addresses service and appeal-fee status; it does not decide the merits of Davis’s claims.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.