Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled July 7, 2023

Peters v. Doe

Judge
Edgardo Ramos
Docket
1:21-cv-05527
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Peters v. Doe, Judge Ramos directed the City to file a status report by July 14, 2023, because the case had been inactive.

Who this affects

Ziphaire W. Peters, the unidentified correction officer, and the City, which was directed to provide a status report.

What happened

Ziphaire W. Peters, representing himself, sued an unidentified correction officer whom he alleged had sexually assaulted him. The court had previously dismissed claims against three other individual defendants and added a John Doe defendant so Peters could pursue the claim against the unidentified officer.

The court had directed the New York City Law Department to identify the officer and had ordered Peters to answer identification questions. Peters and the City had taken no further action since November 29, 2022.

Judge Edgardo Ramos directed the City to submit a status report by Friday, July 14, 2023. The order did not decide the underlying claim.

The detailed version

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

Case
Peters v. Doe · No. 1:21-cv-05527
Judge
Edgardo Ramos
Date
July 7, 2023

Background

Ziphaire W. Peters filed the action on June 23, 2021, representing himself. The complaint alleged that an unidentified correction officer sexually assaulted him. On May 18, 2022, the court dismissed the complaint as to Tinesha Mills, the warden at the Anna M. Kross Center; Assistant Deputy Warden Santiago; and Cynthia Brann, the former Commissioner of the New York City Department of Correction.

The court also directed the Clerk of Court to add a John Doe defendant because Peters intended to sue an unidentified officer. Under the procedure described in the order, the New York City Law Department was directed to determine the officer's identity and address. On November 29, 2022, the court ordered Peters to respond within 60 days to the Law Department's identification questions and granted the Law Department additional time to identify the officer.

Ruling

The court stated that no further action had occurred since November 29, 2022. Judge Edgardo Ramos directed the City to submit a status report by Friday, July 14, 2023. The order did not rule on the merits of Peters's allegation.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.