Palm v. Brooks
- Vincent Briccetti
- 7:22-cv-09729
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Palm v. Brooks, Judge Briccetti extended Palm’s deadline to serve the defendants and denied fee-free appeal status.
The order affected Nicholas M. Palm by extending his deadline to serve Sgt. Jessica Brooks, NBNY PD; Trooper Tyller K. Carrozzo; and Trooper Nathaneal Schack, and by denying fee-free appeal status. It also concerned the U.S. Marshals Service’s ongoing service efforts.
What happened
In Palm v. Brooks, Nicholas M. Palm brought constitutional claims under a federal civil-rights law against Sgt. Jessica Brooks, Trooper Tyller K. Carrozzo, and Trooper Nathaneal Schack. Palm was representing himself and was allowed to proceed without paying court fees.
The court had directed the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the defendants, but the docket did not show that service had occurred. Because the Marshals Service was working on service, the court extended Palm’s deadline under Rule 4(m) to May 1, 2023. Palm’s request for paperwork for a planned application for a volunteer lawyer had already been processed.
Judge Vincent L. Briccetti also ruled that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied Palm permission to appeal without paying fees. The order addressed service and appeal-fee matters; it did not decide the substance of Palm’s constitutional claims.
The detailed version
- Palm v. Brooks · No. 7:22-cv-09729
- Vincent Briccetti
- Mar. 2, 2023
Background
Nicholas M. Palm, proceeding without a lawyer and without paying court fees, brought claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging violations of his constitutional rights. The defendants are Sgt. Jessica Brooks, NBNY PD; Trooper Tyller K. Carrozzo; and Trooper Nathaneal Schack.
Palm filed the complaint on November 14, 2022. On December 19, 2022, the court directed the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the defendants and extended Palm’s time to serve them under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) to 90 days after summonses were issued. The Clerk issued summonses for all defendants that day.
On February 21, 2023, the court received Palm’s letter asking about the status of service. The docket did not show that the defendants had been served, although the court had been informed that the Marshals Service was working to complete service.
Ruling
The court extended Palm’s Rule 4(m) deadline to serve the defendants to May 1, 2023. The order did not decide the merits of Palm’s constitutional claims.
The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without paying fees. Palm’s request for paperwork for an anticipated application for volunteer counsel had been processed by the court’s pro se intake unit on February 21, 2023. Judge Vincent L. Briccetti directed that a copy of the order be mailed to Palm at the address on the docket.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.