Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Nov. 8, 2022

McCallum v. The City of New York

Judge
Paul Engelmayer
Docket
1:22-cv-00081
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In McCallum v. The City of New York, Magistrate Judge Lehrburger ordered officer identification and service assistance for a plaintiff without a lawyer.

Who this affects

Douglas McCallum, Officer Alberto Gonzalez, the three unidentified police officers, the New York City Law Department, the Clerk of Court, and the U.S. Marshals Service.

What happened

McCallum v. The City of New York concerns Douglas McCallum’s amended allegations that police officers falsely arrested and assaulted him on November 15, 2019.

The court said the amended complaint gave the City enough information to identify three unnamed officers, including information about a civilian complaint and the officers’ physical descriptions. McCallum also added Officer Alberto Gonzalez as a defendant.

The court ordered the New York City Law Department to identify the unnamed officers by November 22, 2022. Magistrate Judge Robert W. Lehrburger also directed the Clerk and U.S. Marshals Service to help serve Gonzalez and explained McCallum’s responsibilities concerning the 90-day service period and address changes.

The detailed version

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

Case
McCallum v. The City of New York · No. 1:22-cv-00081
Judge
Paul Engelmayer
Date
Nov. 8, 2022

Background

Douglas McCallum, proceeding without a lawyer, filed an amended complaint alleging that Officer Alberto Gonzalez and three other unidentified officers falsely arrested and assaulted him on November 15, 2019. The court had previously issued an order requiring assistance in identifying an officer named in McCallum’s original complaint. After the City identified Gonzalez, McCallum added him as a defendant and described additional alleged conduct by three unnamed officers.

McCallum requested another order requiring the City to identify those officers. The court explained that a person proceeding without a lawyer is entitled to the district court’s assistance in identifying unknown defendants when the complaint provides enough information to help identify them. The court found that McCallum’s amended complaint supplied sufficient information, including details about a complaint filed with the New York City Civilian Complaint Review Board and physical descriptions of the unnamed officers.

Rulings

The court ordered the New York City Law Department to determine the identities of the unnamed police officers and file its findings on the docket by November 22, 2022.

The court also directed the Clerk of Court to prepare the paperwork needed for the U.S. Marshals Service to serve Gonzalez at the listed New York City Police Department address. The court stated that it would address service on the remaining defendants after the City identified them.

The order reminded McCallum that service must be completed within 90 days after the summons is issued, unless he requests more time, and that he must notify the court in writing if his address changes. The opinion states that failure to keep the court informed of an address change may result in dismissal. Magistrate Judge Robert W. Lehrburger signed the order.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-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.