Calvin Reed v. P.O. Andre Logan
- John Cronan
- 1:22-cv-10446
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 5
In Calvin Reed v. P.O. Andre Logan, Judge Cronan ordered service and defendant-identification steps without deciding Reed’s claims.
Calvin Reed; the identified Department of Corrections and Community Supervision defendants Andre Logan, Medina, Nydia Garcia, and Shanavia Dandridge; the unnamed John Doe and Jane Doe defendants; the New York Attorney General; and the U.S. Marshals Service.
What happened
Calvin Reed v. P.O. Andre Logan concerns Reed’s lawsuit against New York parole personnel. Reed, who is incarcerated and representing himself, alleges violations of federal constitutional rights and state law under a complaint brought against several Department of Corrections and Community Supervision employees.
The court had already allowed Reed to proceed without paying filing fees in advance. It ordered the U.S. Marshals Service to serve four identified defendants and required them to answer specified discovery requests. It also directed New York’s Attorney General to identify the unnamed defendants, after which Reed may file an amended complaint.
Judge John P. Cronan issued the order on February 13, 2023. The order handles service, discovery, and identification of defendants rather than deciding whether Reed’s claims are legally valid, and it denied permission to appeal without prepaying fees.
The detailed version
- Calvin Reed v. P.O. Andre Logan · No. 1:22-cv-10446
- John Cronan
- Feb. 13, 2023
Background
Calvin Reed, who is incarcerated at Fishkill Correctional Facility and is proceeding without a lawyer, brought this action after it was separated from an earlier related proceeding. The operative pleading is an amended complaint originally filed in that earlier proceeding. The court understood the complaint to assert claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a statute allowing claims for certain violations of federal rights by state actors, along with related state-law claims.
Reed seeks damages from Department of Corrections and Community Supervision parole personnel: Parole Officer Andre Logan, Senior Parole Officer Medina, Area Parole Supervisor Nydia Garcia, Senior Parole Officer Shanavia Dandridge, and unidentified John Doe and Jane Doe parole officers.
Court’s actions
The court noted that it had already granted Reed permission to proceed without prepaying filing fees. Because of that status, the court directed the Clerk of Court to issue summonses and provide the U.S. Marshals Service with the documents needed to serve Logan, Medina, Garcia, and Dandridge. The court extended the service period so that service must occur within 90 days after the summonses are issued; if service is not completed within that period, Reed should request more time.
The court also ruled that Local Civil Rule 33.2 applies. That rule requires defendants in certain prisoner cases to respond to specified discovery requests. Logan, Medina, Garcia, and Dandridge must serve responses within 120 days after service of the operative pleading and must quote each request verbatim in their responses.
Unidentified defendants
The court found that the complaint provided enough information for the Department of Corrections and Community Supervision to identify the unnamed defendants. They were described as employees who were present with Logan on September 13, 2019, at the Department of Corrections and Community Supervision Bronx Area III Parole Office when Reed surrendered to custody.
The court directed the New York Attorney General to provide the unnamed defendants’ identities, service addresses, and, when applicable, badge numbers to the court and Reed within 60 days. Within 30 days after receiving that information, Reed must file an amended complaint naming any newly identified defendants. That amended complaint will replace, rather than supplement, the current complaint. The court stated that it will screen the amended complaint and, if necessary, issue another service order.
Disposition
The court directed service on Logan, Medina, Garcia, and Dandridge; directed those defendants to comply with Local Civil Rule 33.2; and directed the Attorney General to identify the unnamed defendants. It also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without prepaying fees. This order did not decide the merits of Reed’s constitutional or state-law claims.
Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.