Castelan v. John
- Nelson Roman
- 7:22-cv-09326
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Castelan v. John, Judge Roman ordered federal marshals to serve Shaun H. Kerr after an earlier service attempt failed.
Christian Castelan and Shaun H. Kerr, primarily; the clerk and the U.S. Marshals Service were directed to take steps to complete service.
What happened
Castelan v. John concerns Christian Castelan’s lawsuit for damages under a federal civil-rights law against three Sing Sing correctional employees. Castelan is representing himself and was allowed to proceed without paying the filing fee upfront.
The court had previously directed service on all defendants, but an attempt to serve Shaun H. Kerr was unsuccessful. A court order provided Kerr’s address on July 12, 2023.
The court ordered the clerk to prepare the paperwork and summons needed for federal marshals to serve Kerr. Judge Roman also said Castelan must request more time if service is not completed within 90 days after the summons is issued.
The detailed version
- Castelan v. John · No. 7:22-cv-09326
- Nelson Roman
- July 13, 2023
Background
Christian Castelan, who is incarcerated at Sing Sing Correctional Facility, filed this lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 seeking damages. The opinion states that he is representing himself. He sued Correctional Officer Keenan A. John, Correctional Officer Shaun H. Kerr, and Correctional Sergeant Bermann Joseph over events allegedly occurring at Sing Sing.
The court had granted Castelan permission to proceed without prepaying filing fees and had directed service on all defendants. The U.S. Marshals Service attempted to serve Kerr, but that attempt was returned unexecuted on March 17, 2023. A court order issued on July 12, 2023, provided an address for Kerr.
Ruling
The court directed the clerk to complete a U.S. Marshals Service process form for Kerr, issue a summons, and provide the necessary papers to the Marshals Service so it could serve him. The court stated that if service was not completed within 90 days after the summons was issued, Castelan should request an extension of time. It also required Castelan to notify the court in writing if his address changed and stated that the case could be dismissed if he failed to do so.
The court extended the service period to 90 days after the summonses were issued because Castelan was proceeding without prepaying fees and could not serve the summons and complaint until the court reviewed the complaint and ordered the summonses issued. The order did not decide whether Castelan’s underlying claims were legally valid.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.