Walker v. Capra
- Vincent Briccetti
- 7:22-cv-07638
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 5
In Walker v. Capra, Judge Briccetti ordered service and automatic discovery in Gerald Walker’s constitutional-rights lawsuit.
Gerald Walker and the 12 defendants named for service, including Michael Capra, Anthony Annucci, and other Sing Sing Correctional Facility personnel. The order also directs the Clerk and the U.S. Marshals Service to take specified service-related actions.
What happened
Gerald Walker v. Michael Capra concerns Walker’s amended lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, claiming that the defendants violated his constitutional rights. Walker is incarcerated, is representing himself, and received permission to proceed without paying filing fees. The court had previously directed him to correct problems in his original complaint.
The court directed the Clerk to issue summonses and prepare service forms for 12 defendants, and directed the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the amended complaint. The court also ruled that the prisoner-case discovery procedure in Local Civil Rule 33.2 applies, requiring defendants to respond to specified discovery requests within 120 days after service.
Judge Vincent L. Briccetti entered an order of service, directed the Clerk to carry out those instructions, and denied Walker permission to appeal without paying fees because the court certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith. The order did not decide whether Walker’s constitutional claims are valid.
The detailed version
- Walker v. Capra · No. 7:22-cv-07638
- Vincent Briccetti
- Jan. 19, 2023
Background
Gerald Walker, who is incarcerated at Upstate Correctional Facility, filed an amended complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal law that permits certain constitutional-rights claims against government officials. Walker is proceeding without a lawyer and without paying the filing fee. The opinion states that he alleges the defendants violated his constitutional rights. After the court directed him to address deficiencies in his original complaint, Walker filed the amended complaint on January 3, 2023.
Service of the Complaint
Because Walker was permitted to proceed without paying the filing fee, the court stated that he could rely on the court and the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the defendants. The Clerk was instructed to complete U.S. Marshals Service process forms, issue summonses, and provide the Marshals Service with the documents needed to serve Michael Capra, Anthony Annucci, Velez, A. Rodriguez, Lieutenant Bosch, DSS Thorpe, A. Helms, Q. Quick, FSA Stasko, SORC Manuel, Y. Cheverez, and Grant Hill.
The court stated that the amended complaint must be served within 90 days after the summonses are issued. If service is not completed within that period, Walker should request more time. The court also directed Walker to notify it in writing if his address changes and stated that the action may be dismissed if he fails to do so.
Automatic Discovery
The court ruled that Local Civil Rule 33.2 applies to this action. Under that rule, the defendants must serve responses to the specified prisoner-case interrogatories and document requests within 120 days after service of the complaint. The responses must quote each discovery request word for word. The opinion states that Walker may request copies of the discovery requests from the Pro Se Intake Unit if he cannot access them online.
Disposition
Judge Vincent L. Briccetti ordered the Clerk to issue the summonses, complete the service forms with the defendants’ addresses, and deliver the necessary documents to the U.S. Marshals Service. The court also applied Local Civil Rule 33.2 to the action. Finally, the court certified that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without paying filing fees. The order addressed service and discovery; it did not decide the merits of Walker’s constitutional-rights allegations.
Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.