Mullings v. Burnett
- Cathy Seibel
- 7:22-cv-07922
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 12
In Mullings v. Burnett, Judge Seibel ordered service and identification of unnamed defendants in a civil-rights case.
Andrew R. Mullings, the identified defendants, the unnamed Fishkill emergency-response officers, the U.S. Marshals Service, the Clerk of Court, and the New York Attorney General.
What happened
Andrew R. Mullings filed Mullings v. Burnett under a federal civil-rights law, seeking money and declaratory relief from officials and medical personnel connected to Fishkill Correctional Facility. He represented himself and had permission to proceed without prepaying court fees.
The court ordered the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the identified defendants and required those defendants to answer specified discovery requests. It also directed the New York Attorney General to identify the unnamed emergency-response officers and provide their service information. Mullings must then file an amended complaint naming any newly identified defendants.
Judge Cathy Seibel’s order addressed service, discovery, and identifying defendants; it did not decide whether Mullings’s claims were legally valid or whether he should receive damages or other relief.
The detailed version
- Mullings v. Burnett · No. 7:22-cv-07922
- Cathy Seibel
- Oct. 17, 2022
Background
Andrew R. Mullings filed this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal law allowing certain civil-rights claims against state officials, seeking declaratory relief and damages. The opinion states that Mullings filed the complaint while incarcerated at Fishkill Correctional Facility and was later held in immigration detention at the Buffalo Federal Detention Facility. He represented himself.
The defendants named in the complaint were Edward Burnett, Michael Daye, C. Churns, Joseph Noeth, Darren Miller, S. Thompson, M. Pierre, and Gaetan Zamilus, as well as unidentified emergency-response officers. The opinion identifies the named defendants as correctional-facility or state corrections officials, officers, and medical personnel. The unidentified defendants included emergency-response officers who allegedly escorted Mullings from his Fishkill cell to a recreation room and an adjacent room on or about December 29, 2021.
Court’s directives
The court had previously allowed Mullings to proceed without prepaying the filing fee. Because he was no longer incarcerated and was in civil immigration detention, the court stated that he was no longer obligated to pay the filing fee for this action.
For the identified defendants, the court directed the Clerk of Court to issue summonses, complete the U.S. Marshals Service forms with the defendants’ addresses, and send the necessary materials to the Marshals Service. The Marshals Service is responsible for serving the complaint and summonses. Service must occur within 90 days after the summonses are issued. If service is not completed by then, Mullings should request an extension of time.
The court also held that Local Civil Rule 33.2 applies. That rule requires defendants in certain prisoner cases to answer specified discovery requests. The identified defendants must serve responses to those requests within 120 days after service of the complaint and must quote each request verbatim in their responses.
Unidentified defendants and disposition
The court directed the New York Attorney General, as the attorney and agent for the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision, to determine the identities, service addresses, and, if appropriate, badge numbers of the unidentified defendants. The Attorney General must provide that information to Mullings and the court within 60 days of the order.
Within 30 days after receiving the information, Mullings must file an amended complaint naming the newly identified defendants. The amended complaint will replace, rather than supplement, the original complaint. The court stated that it will screen the amended complaint and, if necessary, issue further service instructions.
Judge Cathy Seibel ordered the Clerk of Court to mail Mullings an information package, issue summonses for the identified defendants, and send the order and complaint to the New York Attorney General. The order was procedural: it organized service, discovery, and identification of defendants and did not resolve the merits of Mullings’s civil-rights claims.
Read the full 12-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.