Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled May 2, 2023

Louis v. Morley

Judge
Nelson Roman
Docket
7:22-cv-10094
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
4
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Louis v. Morley, Judge Roman ordered U.S. Marshals service and directed the New York Attorney General to find Morley’s service address.

Who this affects

Kevin Louis, the six defendants named in the amended complaint, the New York State Attorney General, the Clerk of Court, and the U.S. Marshals Service.

What happened

In Louis v. Morley, Kevin Louis, who is incarcerated and representing himself, alleges that medical staff at two correctional facilities were deliberately indifferent to his medical needs under a federal civil-rights law. He amended his complaint to name six defendants, including John Morley.

Because Louis was allowed to proceed without prepaying filing fees, the court directed the Clerk to prepare summonses and service forms and send the necessary papers to the U.S. Marshals Service for service on the six defendants. The court also extended the service period to 90 days after the summonses are issued.

The court also ordered the New York State Attorney General to provide Louis and the court with a service address for John Morley within 21 days. Judge Nelson S. Roman further directed Louis to notify the court of any address change.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Louis v. Morley · No. 7:22-cv-10094
Judge
Nelson Roman
Date
May 2, 2023

Background

Kevin Louis, who is incarcerated and proceeding without a lawyer, brings a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging that medical staff at Woodbourne Correctional Facility and Sing Sing Correctional Facility were deliberately indifferent to his medical needs. The court had previously allowed Louis to proceed without prepaying filing fees and had issued an order concerning service of the complaint and identification of unknown defendants.

Louis later filed an amended complaint naming Dr. Harris Baker, David Howard, Dr. John Morley, Aaron Roth, Amy Roycroft, and “Dr. Ruiz.” The docket did not show that several defendants had been served, and the amended complaint added defendants and allegations concerning Morley’s personal involvement.

Court’s action

The court issued a supplemental order of service. Because Louis was allowed to proceed without prepaying fees, the court stated that he could rely on the court and the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the defendants. It instructed the Clerk of Court to prepare U.S. Marshals Service process forms, issue summonses, and deliver the necessary paperwork to the Marshals Service for service on Baker, Howard, Morley, Roth, Roycroft, and “Dr. Ruiz.”

The court stated that service must occur within 90 days after the summonses are issued, and that Louis should request an extension if service is not completed within that period. It also stated that Louis must notify the court in writing if his address changes and that the action may be dismissed if he fails to do so.

Service address for Morley

Under the court’s procedure for helping a self-represented litigant identify a defendant or an unknown address, the court ordered the New York State Attorney General, as the attorney for and agent of the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision, to determine a service address for Dr. Morley. The Attorney General must provide that information to Louis and the court within 21 days of the order. After receiving the information, the court will direct the Clerk to complete the service paperwork and provide the necessary documents to the U.S. Marshals Service.

Disposition

This was a procedural order concerning service of process and identification of a service address. It did not decide whether Louis’s deliberate-indifference allegations were legally or factually proven.

The authoritative version

Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.