Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Apr. 11, 2022

Holmes v. City of New York

Judge
Valerie Caproni
Docket
1:21-cv-10628
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
Civil RightsSection 1983Pro SeCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Holmes v. City of New York, Judge Caproni ordered U.S. Marshals service for three defendants and extended the service deadline.

Who this affects

Stanley Holmes and the three defendants named in the order—James Trapasso, Amanda Vanwieren-Johnson, and Ralph Pena—were affected by the court’s instructions for service of the lawsuit.

What happened

Holmes v. City of New York is a civil-rights case brought by Stanley Holmes, who is incarcerated and is proceeding without a lawyer. He sued three named defendants under a federal law that allows claims against state or local officials, and the court had already allowed him to proceed without paying fees upfront.

Because Holmes could not serve the defendants himself before the court reviewed the amended complaint and issued summonses, the court extended the service deadline. The court said the deadline would be 90 days after the summonses were issued.

Judge Caproni ordered the Clerk of Court to issue summonses, complete service forms, and provide the necessary documents and addresses to the U.S. Marshals Service for service on James Trapasso, Amanda Vanwieren-Johnson, and Ralph Pena. The order did not decide whether Holmes’s claims were legally valid.

The detailed version

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

Case
Holmes v. City of New York · No. 1:21-cv-10628
Judge
Valerie Caproni
Date
Apr. 11, 2022

Background

Stanley Holmes filed this action without a lawyer under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal law used to bring certain civil-rights claims against state or local officials. The opinion states that Holmes is incarcerated at Great Meadow Correctional Facility. The court had previously granted him permission to proceed without paying court fees upfront.

Service of the lawsuit

Because Holmes was allowed to proceed without paying fees upfront, he could rely on the court and the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the defendants. The court explained that the usual rule requires service within 90 days after filing, but Holmes could not serve the defendants until the court reviewed the amended complaint and ordered summonses to issue.

The court therefore extended the service period to 90 days after the summonses were issued. It stated that, if service was not completed within that period, Holmes should ask for more time. The court also ordered Holmes to notify it in writing if his address changes and stated that the action could be dismissed if he failed to do so.

Ruling

Judge Valerie Caproni instructed the Clerk of Court to issue summonses for James Trapasso, Amanda Vanwieren-Johnson, and Ralph Pena; complete the U.S. Marshals Service process forms with the defendants’ addresses; and deliver the necessary documents to the Marshals Service. This was an order concerning service of the lawsuit, not a decision on the merits of Holmes’s claims.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-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.