Robertson v. Fluerinord

Background

Dale Robertson, who is representing himself, brought this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal law that allows claims for violations of constitutional rights by state or local officials. He alleges false arrest, malicious prosecution, excessive force, and claims under state law against Jacqueline Fluerinord, Police Officers John Doe #1 to #4, the City of New York, and Westchester County. The opinion states that the alleged arrest occurred on or around September 7, 2020, but it does not decide the merits of the allegations.

The court had previously allowed Robertson to proceed without paying court fees in advance. In such cases, federal law requires the court to direct the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the defendants.

Service of the Complaint

The court directed the Clerk of Court to issue summonses for Westchester County, the City of New York, and Jacqueline Fluerinord, complete the required service forms, and provide the necessary papers to the U.S. Marshals Service. The court extended the service period so that the 90-day period would run from the date the summonses are issued. If service is not completed within 90 days after issuance, Robertson must request more time. The court also instructed Robertson to notify the court in writing if his address changes and warned that the action may be dismissed if he does not do so.

Unnamed Officers

The complaint names four police officers as John Does, but the opinion says it is unclear which officers arrested Robertson. The court ordered the New York City Law Department, the Town of Greenburgh Town Attorney, and Village Counsel for the Village of Elmsford to determine the identities, badge numbers, and service addresses of the unnamed officers whom Robertson seeks to sue. Those entities must provide the information to Robertson and the court within 60 days of the order.

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

Disposition

This is an order concerning service and identification of defendants. The court did not grant or deny the underlying claims and did not determine whether the alleged false arrest, malicious prosecution, excessive force, or state-law claims are legally or factually valid. Judge John G. Koeltl ordered the Clerk, the U.S. Marshals Service, and the specified government legal offices to take the service and identification steps described above.