Louime v. Camama
- Vincent Briccetti
- 7:21-cv-09594
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Louime v. Camama, Judge Briccetti directed efforts to locate three defendants and extended the deadline for serving them.
David Louime, the three defendants whose service addresses were sought—Tamie Camama, M. Merced, and P. Squire—and the New York State Attorney General’s Office.
What happened
David Louime, representing himself and proceeding without paying filing fees, brought this action against several employees and officials connected to Green Haven Correctional Facility. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims.
The U.S. Marshals Service tried to serve Tamie Camama, M. Merced, and P. Squire at Green Haven, but the service papers came back unfinished because they were no longer located there. The court directed the New York State Attorney General to provide service addresses for those defendants by April 12, 2022, and extended Louime’s service deadline to May 23, 2022.
Judge Vincent L. Briccetti issued this procedural order and stated that Louime could ask for more time if service was not completed by the extended deadline.
The detailed version
- Louime v. Camama · No. 7:21-cv-09594
- Vincent Briccetti
- Feb. 22, 2022
Background
David Louime filed a complaint and was representing himself while proceeding without paying filing fees. Because of that status, the court said he could rely on the court and the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the defendants.
The Marshals Service attempted to serve Superintendent Tamie Camama, Correction Officer M. Merced, and Correction Officer P. Squire at Green Haven Correctional Facility. The service receipts were returned unexecuted, meaning service was not completed, and the receipts showed that these defendants were no longer located at that facility.
Court’s Order
The court directed the New York State Attorney General to provide, by April 12, 2022, addresses where Camama, Merced, and Squire could be served. The court also extended Louime’s deadline to serve those defendants to May 23, 2022. The court stated that, if service was not completed by then, Louime should request another extension of time.
The order addressed service of process only; it did not decide the underlying claims. Chambers was directed to mail the order to Louime and to the New York State Attorney General’s Office.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.