Barzee v. Abdulla
- Philip Halpern
- 7:23-cv-02328
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Barzee v. Abdulla, Judge Halpern ordered service on five newly identified defendants and required more information about one Doe defendant.
Saio Barzee, the five newly identified correctional defendants, the possible Doe #20 defendants, the Clerk of Court, and the U.S. Marshals Service.
What happened
In Barzee v. Abdulla, Saio Barzee alleges under a federal civil-rights law that defendants violated his rights while he was confined at Sing Sing Correctional Facility. He is incarcerated at Lakeview Shock Incarceration Correctional Facility and was allowed to proceed without prepaying filing fees.
The New York Attorney General’s Office identified five additional defendants: Officers C. Garrett, T. Maid, and G. Darden; Officer M. Ruquet; and Lieutenant E. Pagan. The court also directed Barzee to provide a physical description or other information to help identify John Doe Defendant #20, who could be Officer J. Caban or Officer S. Marsar.
Judge Philip M. Halpern directed the Clerk of Court to issue summonses and prepare paperwork so the U.S. Marshals Service could serve the five newly identified defendants. The court also said Barzee should request more time if service is not completed within 90 days after the summonses are issued, and denied permission to proceed without prepaying fees for an appeal from this order.
The detailed version
- Barzee v. Abdulla · No. 7:23-cv-02328
- Philip Halpern
- July 21, 2023
Background
Saio Barzee brought this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that the defendants violated his rights while he was confined at Sing Sing Correctional Facility. The court had previously allowed Barzee to proceed without prepaying filing fees and had issued orders concerning service on named defendants and unidentified John and Jane Doe defendants.
The New York Attorney General’s Office identified three previously unnamed defendants—Officer C. Nickens, Officer P. Byrd, and Sgt. Gonzalez—and the court had already issued an order concerning service on them. The Attorney General’s Office later identified five more defendants: Officer C. Garrett, Officer T. Maid, Officer G. Darden, Officer M. Ruquet, and Lieutenant E. Pagan. It also narrowed John Doe Defendant #20 to two possible correction officers, Officer J. Caban and Officer S. Marsar, but requested more information from Barzee to determine which officer he intended to name.
Court’s Orders
Because Barzee was allowed to proceed without prepaying fees, the court explained that he could rely on the court and the U.S. Marshals Service to carry out service of the summons and complaint. Judge Philip M. Halpern directed the Clerk of Court to complete a U.S. Marshals Service Process Receipt and Return form, issue summonses, and deliver the required documents to the Marshals Service for service on Garrett, Maid, Darden, Ruquet, and Pagan.
The court directed Barzee to provide a physical description or other identifying information if he wished to continue pursuing John Doe Defendant #20. It stated that if the complaint was not served within 90 days after the summons was issued, Barzee should request an extension of time. The court also required Barzee to notify the court in writing of any address change and warned that the action could be dismissed if he failed to do so.
The court directed the Clerk to mail the order and complaint to the New York State Attorney General and an information package to Barzee. It certified 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. This order addressed service and related case administration; it did not decide whether Barzee’s underlying civil-rights allegations were valid.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.