Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled May 5, 2022

Tamarez v. Hochul

Judge
Gregory Woods
Docket
1:21-cv-10678
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Tamarez v. Hochul, Judge Cave extended the service deadline for state defendants after earlier service attempts failed.

Who this affects

Madelyn Tamarez and the state defendants, including Kathleen Hochul and the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision; the New York State Attorney General and the U.S. Marshals Service were also directed or asked to take service-related actions.

What happened

In Tamarez v. Hochul, Madelyn Tamarez, who was incarcerated and representing herself, sued New York Governor Kathleen Hochul and other defendants. She was allowed to proceed without paying the filing fee, so the court and U.S. Marshals Service were responsible for helping serve the defendants.

The Marshals Service tried to obtain service waivers and later mailed summonses and the complaint to the state defendants, but they did not respond or appear. The City defendants had waived service, and an earlier order had dismissed claims against other named defendants for failure to state a claim.

The court asked the New York State Attorney General to acknowledge receipt of the papers or waive service for the state defendants. It also extended Tamarez’s deadline to serve those defendants to July 6, 2022. United States Magistrate Judge Sarah L. Cave issued the order.

The detailed version

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

Case
Tamarez v. Hochul · No. 1:21-cv-10678
Judge
Gregory Woods
Date
May 5, 2022

Background

Madelyn Tamarez, who was incarcerated at Rikers Island and representing herself, was proceeding without paying the filing fee. She sued, among others, Kathleen Hochul, identified as the Governor of New York, and the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision. The court had previously directed the U.S. Marshals Service to serve those state defendants. An earlier order also dismissed Tamarez’s claims against other named defendants for failure to state a claim; this order addressed service on the state defendants.

The U.S. Marshals Service mailed the state defendants forms seeking waivers of service but received no response. It then mailed additional copies of the summons and complaint by first-class mail. The state defendants did not acknowledge receipt or appear in the case. The City defendants had waived service.

Court’s action

Rather than direct the Marshals Service to make further service attempts, the court asked the New York State Attorney General, described in the order as the attorney for and agent of New York State, to acknowledge receipt of the summons and complaint or waive service for the state defendants. The court reminded the Attorney General and the state defendants that federal and New York rules require parties to avoid unnecessary service expenses. It stated that the state defendants could be required to pay service expenses if they did not accept service by mail.

The court granted Tamarez an extension of time to serve the state defendants until July 6, 2022. The Clerk of Court was directed to send a certified-mail copy of the order and complaint to the New York State Attorney General. The order did not decide the merits of Tamarez’s claims against the state defendants.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.