Tyson v. Green Dot Corporation
- Jesse Furman
- 1:22-cv-02050
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Tyson v. Green Dot Corporation, Judge Furman granted more time for service but denied Tyson’s second request for counsel without prejudice.
Sheila Tyson and the defendants, Green Dot Corporation and Green Dot Bank doing business as GO2BANK.
What happened
In Tyson v. Green Dot Corporation, Sheila Tyson asked for more time to serve Green Dot Corporation and Green Dot Bank, doing business as GO2BANK, and again asked the court to appoint counsel.
The court granted the service extension and set August 26, 2022, as the new deadline, applying the extension retroactively. It denied the second request for counsel without prejudice, allowing Tyson to renew it if she could show a potentially meritorious claim. The court also provided information about a local legal clinic.
Judge Jesse M. Furman ordered the clerk to mail Tyson a copy of the order. The order did not decide the underlying claims.
The detailed version
- Tyson v. Green Dot Corporation · No. 1:22-cv-02050
- Jesse Furman
- July 22, 2022
Background
Sheila Tyson sued Green Dot Corporation and Green Dot Bank, doing business as GO2BANK. She requested an extension of the deadline for serving the defendants and made a second application for appointment of counsel. The opinion refers to the court’s earlier orders but does not describe the underlying claims.
Rulings
The court granted Tyson’s request for an extension of the service deadline. It extended the deadline, retroactively, to August 26, 2022. The court reminded Tyson that she was responsible for requesting another extension if she did not serve the defendants by that date.
The court denied without prejudice Tyson’s second application for counsel. It stated that she could renew the request when she could demonstrate the existence of a potentially meritorious claim, for substantially the same reasons given in the court’s July 11, 2022 order. The court also informed Tyson about the Pro Se Law Clinic operated by the New York Legal Assistance Group and explained that the clinic is not part of the court and cannot file papers for her.
Disposition
Judge Jesse M. Furman directed the clerk to mail Tyson a copy of the order. This order addressed service and counsel; it did not resolve the merits of Tyson’s claims.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.