Grajales v. Snagg
- Katherine Failla
- 1:23-cv-01422
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 14
In Grajales v. Snagg, Judge Failla ordered identification and service steps for Grajales’s constitutional and state-law claims.
Fernando Grajales must provide an amended complaint after receiving identifying information and must follow service and address-notification requirements. The Corporation Counsel, Clerk of Court, and U.S. Marshals Service must take the directed identification and service steps; New York City is to be served.
What happened
In Grajales v. Snagg, Fernando Grajales, representing himself, sued two police officers, New York City, and an unidentified cab driver. He alleges violations of his constitutional rights and also asserts state-law claims, seeking damages.
The court directed New York City’s attorney to provide the police officers’ badge numbers and service addresses and to identify the cab driver and provide a service address. Grajales must file an amended complaint within 30 days after receiving that information. The court also ordered the Clerk and U.S. Marshals Service to serve New York City.
Judge Katherine Polk Failla did not decide whether Grajales’s claims are valid. The order requires the case to proceed through identification, amendment, screening, and service steps.
The detailed version
- Grajales v. Snagg · No. 1:23-cv-01422
- Katherine Failla
- Mar. 27, 2023
Background
Fernando Grajales brings this case without a lawyer. He asserts claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a law that allows claims for violations of federal constitutional rights by state or local actors, and claims under state law. He names Police Officers Christopher Snagg and Lamarr Barnes, New York City, and an unidentified “John Doe” livery-cab driver as defendants. The opinion says Grajales alleges that the officers were involved in his arrest in Manhattan on or about February 19, 2022, and that the cab driver pressed criminal charges that resulted in the arrest. Grajales seeks damages.
The court had previously allowed Grajales to proceed without paying court fees in advance. This order concerns identifying defendants and arranging service of the case; it does not decide the merits of his claims.
Identification of Defendants and Amended Complaint
The court directed the Corporation Counsel of the City of New York to determine and provide to Grajales and the court:
- The badge numbers and service addresses of Christopher Snagg and Lamarr Barnes; and - The identity and service address of the unidentified “John Doe” cab driver.
The Corporation Counsel must provide this information within 60 days after the date of the order. Within 30 days after receiving it, Grajales must file an amended complaint naming the newly identified defendant and including the newly provided information. The amended complaint will replace, rather than supplement, the original complaint. The court will screen the amended complaint and, if necessary, issue another order directing service on the police officers and the newly identified defendant.
Service on New York City
The court directed the Clerk of Court to issue a summons for New York City, complete a U.S. Marshals Service process form, and send the necessary papers to the Marshals Service so it can serve the City. If the complaint is not served within 90 days after the summons is issued, Grajales should request more time to complete service. He must also notify the court in writing if his address changes; the court stated that failure to do so may result in dismissal of the case.
Other Information
The court included information about the New York Legal Assistance Group’s free clinic for people representing themselves in civil cases in the Southern District of New York. The clinic is operated by a private organization and is not part of the court.
Disposition
The court entered an order directing defendant-identification and service procedures. It also directed the Clerk to mail Grajales an information package and an unredacted version of the order, to restrict public access to the unredacted complaint, and to provide unredacted copies of the order and complaint to the Corporation Counsel. The order does not state a ruling on whether any defendant violated Grajales’s rights or is liable for damages.
Read the full 14-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.