Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled May 8, 2023

Kelly v. Thomas

Judge
Cathy Seibel
Docket
7:23-cv-02597
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
9
Civil RightsSection 1983Pro SeCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Kelly v. Thomas, Judge Seibel ordered service and identification of unnamed officers in Kelly’s civil-rights case without deciding the claims.

Who this affects

Shytique D. Kelly, Ileshema Thomas, K. Muller, the four unnamed correction officers, the New York State Attorney General, the Clerk of Court, and the U.S. Marshals Service.

What happened

In Kelly v. Thomas, Shytique D. Kelly, who is incarcerated at Green Haven Correctional Facility, brought a self-represented civil-rights lawsuit claiming excessive force and inadequate medical care by correction officers. The court had already allowed Kelly to proceed without paying court fees upfront.

The court ordered the Clerk to issue summonses and provide the U.S. Marshals Service with the materials needed to serve Ileshema Thomas and K. Muller. It also directed the New York State Attorney General to identify the four unnamed correction officers and provide their badge numbers and service addresses. Kelly must file an amended complaint naming those officers within 30 days after receiving the information.

Judge Cathy Seibel also applied the court’s standard prisoner-discovery rule, referred Kelly to the New York Legal Assistance Group’s clinic, and denied fee-free status for any appeal because the court certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith. This order did not decide whether Kelly’s excessive-force or medical-care claims were legally or factually valid.

The detailed version

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

Case
Kelly v. Thomas · No. 7:23-cv-02597
Judge
Cathy Seibel
Date
May 8, 2023

Background

Shytique D. Kelly, who is incarcerated at Green Haven Correctional Facility, filed a self-represented action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The complaint asserts excessive-force and inadequate-medical-care claims against Green Haven correction officers Ileshema Thomas and K. Muller, and against four unnamed correction officers identified as John Doe defendants. The court had previously granted Kelly permission to proceed without paying filing fees upfront.

Service on Thomas and Muller

Because Kelly was allowed to proceed without prepaying fees, the court stated that Kelly could rely on the court and the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the defendants. The Clerk of Court was instructed to complete the required service forms, issue summonses for Thomas and Muller, and deliver the necessary papers to the Marshals Service. The court stated that service must occur within 90 days after the summonses are issued, unless Kelly requests an extension. Kelly was also required to notify the court in writing of any address change.

Identifying the John Doe defendants

The court stated that a self-represented litigant is entitled to the court’s assistance in identifying an unnamed defendant. It found that Kelly had supplied enough information for the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision to identify the four John Doe officers involved in the alleged November 29, 2022 deprivation of rights. The New York State Attorney General was ordered to determine each officer’s identity, badge number, and service address and provide that information to Kelly and the court within 60 days of the order.

Kelly must file an amended complaint naming the John Doe defendants within 30 days after receiving that information. The amended complaint will replace, rather than supplement, the original complaint. The court stated that it would screen the amended complaint and, if necessary, direct the Clerk to arrange service on the newly named defendants.

Discovery and legal clinic referral

The court ruled that Local Civil Rule 33.2 applies. That rule requires defendants in certain prisoner cases to respond to specified, court-ordered interrogatories and document requests. Defendants must serve responses to those standard requests within 120 days of the order and must quote each request verbatim in their responses.

The court referred Kelly to the New York Legal Assistance Group’s Pro Se Clinic for possible limited-scope assistance. The opinion explained that the clinic is a private organization and is not part of the court. Kelly would remain self-represented unless separate representation were arranged.

Disposition

The court ordered the Clerk to issue summonses and arrange Marshals Service for Thomas and Muller, directed the Attorney General to identify the John Doe defendants, applied Local Civil Rule 33.2, and referred Kelly to the New York Legal Assistance Group’s clinic. The court did not decide the merits of Kelly’s excessive-force or inadequate-medical-care claims. It also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without prepaying fees for purposes of an appeal.

The authoritative version

Read the full 9-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.