Owens v. Orange County Jail
- Vincent Briccetti
- 7:22-cv-06487
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Owens v. Orange County Jail, Judge Briccetti extended service deadlines and denied Orange County’s dismissal motion without prejudice.
The order affects the plaintiff, Imam Malik Kedar, and Orange County by arranging service on Kedar, pausing Orange County’s response deadline, and allowing Orange County to renew its dismissal motion after service.
What happened
Owens v. Orange County Jail concerns constitutional claims brought under a federal civil-rights law by a plaintiff representing himself and not paying the filing fee. The court had directed federal marshals to serve Imam Malik Kedar and Orange County, but service on Kedar was unsuccessful.
After Orange County provided an address for Kedar, the court directed the clerk and marshals to try service again and extended Owens’s deadline to serve Kedar to April 25, 2023. The court also paused Orange County’s deadline to respond to the complaint.
Judge Briccetti denied Orange County’s pending motion to dismiss without prejudice to renewing it after Kedar is served, and directed the clerk to terminate that motion. The court also denied fee-free status for any appeal from this order because it would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Owens v. Orange County Jail · No. 7:22-cv-06487
- Vincent Briccetti
- Jan. 5, 2023
Background
The plaintiff, proceeding without a lawyer and without paying the filing fee, brought claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging violations of constitutional rights. The complaint was filed on July 29, 2022, against Imam Malik Kedar and Orange County.
On September 16, 2022, the court directed the U.S. Marshals Service to serve Kedar and Orange County. The court extended the plaintiff’s service deadline under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) to 90 days after summonses were issued. On December 16, 2022, the Marshals Service reported that it had been unable to serve Kedar. On December 21, 2022, the court directed Orange County to provide Kedar’s correct service address. Orange County then provided an address.
Court’s Actions
The court ordered the following:
- The clerk was instructed to prepare the required service paperwork, issue a summons for Kedar, and provide the necessary materials and service address to the U.S. Marshals Service.
- The plaintiff’s Rule 4(m) deadline to serve Kedar was extended to April 25,
- 3. Orange County’s pending motion to dismiss the complaint was denied without prejudice to renewal after Kedar was served. “Without prejudice” means the order did not prevent Orange County from renewing the motion later. The clerk was directed to terminate the pending motion.
- Orange County’s deadline to respond to the complaint under Rule 12 was stayed until the court issued a further order.
Other Rulings
The court certified that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith and denied the plaintiff fee-free status for purposes of an appeal. The court also directed the plaintiff to notify the court in writing of any address change and stated that the action could be dismissed if the plaintiff failed to do so.
What the Order Did Not Decide
The order addressed service, scheduling, and the handling of Orange County’s motion to dismiss. It did not decide the merits of the plaintiff’s constitutional claims or the merits of Orange County’s motion to dismiss.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.