Mazzei v. Jackson
- Philip Halpern
- 7:22-cv-00146
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Mazzei v. Jackson, Judge Halpern dismissed the action without prejudice because Mazzei did not timely serve Jackson.
Raymond Mazzei’s action against Barbara Jackson was dismissed without prejudice, and the case was closed.
What happened
Mazzei v. Jackson was a diversity lawsuit filed by Raymond Mazzei against Barbara Jackson. Mazzei filed the complaint on January 6, 2022, but the opinion says he never filed proof that Jackson had been served.
The court gave Mazzei notice that the case could be dismissed if he did not serve Jackson or explain why service had not occurred. After Mazzei requested more time, the court extended the deadline to September 27, 2022, and stated that no further extensions would be granted.
Judge Philip M. Halpern dismissed the action without prejudice because Mazzei failed to complete timely service under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m). The Clerk of Court was directed to close the case.
The detailed version
- Mazzei v. Jackson · No. 7:22-cv-00146
- Philip Halpern
- Nov. 3, 2022
Background
Raymond Mazzei filed this diversity action against Barbara Jackson on January 6, 2022. He requested a summons on January 24, 2022, and the summons was issued on January 25, 2022.
On June 6, 2022, the court ordered Mazzei to either file proof that Jackson had been served or explain in writing why he had not complied with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m). That rule generally requires service within 120 days after the complaint is filed. Mazzei responded by asking for additional time to locate Jackson and complete service. On June 29, 2022, the court extended the service deadline to September 27, 2022, and stated that no further extensions would be granted.
Court’s Analysis
The court found that its June 6 order provided the notice required before dismissal under Rule 4(m). Despite the additional time, Mazzei did not file proof showing that Jackson had been served. The court therefore concluded that dismissal was appropriate.
Disposition
The action was dismissed without prejudice for failure to effect timely service. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the case. This was a procedural dismissal based on failure to complete service; the opinion did not decide the underlying claims.
Classification
Procedural order.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.