Megginson v. Morales
- Vyskocil
- 1:22-cv-03815
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 9
In Megginson v. Morales, Judge Vyskocil ordered officials to identify several defendants so Megginson could amend his complaint.
Michael E. Megginson; the defendants he named whose identities or service addresses were unclear; the New York City Law Department; and the court.
What happened
In Megginson v. Morales, Michael E. Megginson, representing himself, sued several people and the City of New York. Some defendants agreed to accept the lawsuit papers, but the Department of Correction could not identify several others from the information in the complaint.
The court ordered the New York City Law Department to determine the identities and service addresses of the unidentified defendants and provide that information to Megginson and the court within 30 days. Megginson must then file an amended complaint naming the proper defendants within 30 days after receiving the information. The amended complaint will replace the original complaint.
Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil did not decide the underlying claims. The court said it would screen the amended complaint after it is filed and, if needed, ask defendants to accept service of the lawsuit papers.
The detailed version
- Megginson v. Morales · No. 1:22-cv-03815
- Vyskocil
- July 12, 2022
Background
Michael E. Megginson, proceeding without a lawyer, filed a complaint on May 10, 2022. He named several defendants, including Department of Correction personnel, personnel associated with the New York State Office of Mental Health or the Department of Correction, and the City of New York.
The court previously directed that most defendants be asked to waive service of the summons and complaint. The City of New York, Tiffany Morales, Tyneka Greene, Jermaine Phillips, Charlton Lemon, and Lilwania Glover agreed to waive service. The Department of Correction declined to waive service on behalf of CO Kanol, Secretary Hammon, Hearing Officer Cumberbatch, and Captain Ingram. It reported that it could not match some of the names and titles to employees, could not identify Cumberbatch from the complaint, and found multiple employees matching Ingram's name and title, none assigned to GRVC.
Court’s Analysis
The court relied on the rule that a person representing himself is entitled to help from the district court in identifying a defendant. The court found that Megginson’s complaint provided enough information for the Department of Correction to identify the defendants at issue.
The court also addressed Evan Beiterman. It could not determine from the complaint whether Beiterman worked for the New York City Department of Correction or the New York State Office of Mental Health. The court had therefore directed the New York State Attorney General or the New York City Corporation Counsel to determine Beiterman’s employer and, if necessary, an address where he could be served.
Order
The court ordered the New York City Law Department, as the attorney and agent for the Department of Correction, to determine the identity of the individuals Megginson sought to sue and the addresses where they could be served. The Law Department must provide that information to Megginson and the court within 30 days of the order.
Within 30 days after receiving the information, Megginson must file an amended complaint naming the proper defendants. The amended complaint will replace, rather than supplement, the original complaint. After the amended complaint is filed, the court will screen it and may issue another order asking defendants to waive service.
Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil also directed the Clerk of Court to mail the order and an information package to Megginson. The order did not decide whether any defendant violated Megginson’s rights or otherwise reach the merits of his claims.
Read the full 9-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.