Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Oct. 28, 2022

Boyd v. Guthrie

Judge
Nelson Roman
Docket
7:22-cv-08549
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
5
Civil ProcedureCivil RightsDiscoveryPro Se
In one sentence

In Boyd v. Guthrie, Judge Roman ordered service on all defendants and required their responses to standard prisoner-case discovery.

Who this affects

Nyjee Boyd and the fifteen named defendants, who were affected by the service instructions and the discovery deadline.

What happened

In Boyd v. Guthrie, Nyjee Boyd, who is incarcerated and representing himself, sued correctional employees and others for damages under a federal civil-rights law. The order did not decide whether Boyd’s claims were valid.

Because Boyd had permission to proceed without prepaying filing fees, the court directed the Clerk of Court and the U.S. Marshals Service to serve all defendants. The court also extended the service deadline to 90 days after the summonses are issued and instructed Boyd to notify the court if his address changes.

Judge Nelson S. Roman further directed the defendants to answer standard prisoner-case discovery requests under Local Civil Rule 33.2 within 120 days after service of the complaint. The court ordered the Clerk to mail Boyd a copy of the order and an information package.

The detailed version

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

Case
Boyd v. Guthrie · No. 7:22-cv-08549
Judge
Nelson Roman
Date
Oct. 28, 2022

Background

Nyjee Boyd, who is incarcerated at Coxsackie Correctional Facility and is representing himself, brought an action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 seeking damages based on events allegedly occurring at Sing Sing Correctional Facility. The defendants include correctional officers, correctional sergeants, a nurse, a disciplinary hearing officer, a superintendent, and a deputy superintendent.

The court had previously granted Boyd permission to proceed without prepaying filing fees. This order addressed service of the complaint and discovery procedures; it did not decide the merits of Boyd’s claims.

Service of the Complaint

The court directed the Clerk of Court to issue a summons for each defendant, complete a U.S. Marshals Service Process Receipt and Return form for each defendant, and provide the necessary documents to the U.S. Marshals Service. The Marshals Service is responsible for serving the defendants because Boyd was permitted to proceed without prepaying fees.

The court stated that if the complaint is not served within 90 days after the summonses are issued, Boyd should request an extension of time. The court also instructed Boyd to notify the court in writing if his address changes and stated that the action may be dismissed if he fails to do so.

Discovery Requirement

The court determined that Local Civil Rule 33.2 applies. That rule requires defendants in certain prisoner cases to respond to specified court-ordered discovery requests. The defendants must serve responses to the standard interrogatories and document requests within 120 days after service of the complaint, and their responses must quote each request verbatim.

Disposition

The court directed the Clerk to mail Boyd the order and an information package, issue summonses for all defendants, complete the service forms, and deliver the necessary documents to the U.S. Marshals Service. The court further directed the defendants to comply with Local Civil Rule 33.2 within 120 days after service of the complaint. This was a procedural order concerning service and discovery, not a ruling on the underlying claims.

The authoritative version

Read the full 5-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.