Brock v. CVS Corporation

Background

Terrell K. Brock, who was representing himself and had permission to proceed without paying filing fees, filed a fourth amended complaint. The complaint added White Plains Police Officers DiPaterio, Glynn, Horgan, and Levito, but did not include Police Officer Vanderwalker, whom Brock had named in an earlier complaint. Brock alleged that he was falsely arrested for petit larceny on April 13, 2020. The White Plains Law Department had identified Vanderwalker as the officer who arrested Brock and had agreed to accept service for him.

Court’s Reasoning

Under Rule 21 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a court may add or remove a party when appropriate for efficiency and fairness. The court concluded that the fourth amended complaint should be understood as asserting claims against Vanderwalker because the complaint described the same arrest, the White Plains Law Department identified Vanderwalker as involved, and Brock clearly intended to pursue claims against him. Because Brock was proceeding without paying filing fees, he could rely on the court and the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the defendants.

Orders

The court directed the clerk to add Horgan and Vanderwalker to the docket, issue summonses for Beall, DiPaterio, Glynn, Horgan, Levito, Schneider, and Vanderwalker, and provide the necessary documents and addresses to the U.S. Marshals Service. The Marshals Service was also instructed to serve Formoso because proof of service had not yet been filed. The court extended Brock’s deadline to serve the remaining defendants until 90 days after the new summonses are issued. The deadlines for all parties to answer, file motions, or otherwise respond to the fourth amended complaint and any cross-claims remained stayed. Finally, Judge Briccetti certified that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal. The order did not decide the underlying claims.