Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Aug. 2, 2023

Jones-Bey v. Stanislov

Judge
Lorna Schofield
Docket
1:23-cv-05599
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Jones-Bey v. Stanislov, Judge Schofield directed the U.S. Marshals Service to serve defendants after Jones-Bey was allowed to proceed without paying fees.

Who this affects

Sister E. Jones-Bey and the three defendants—Skarbo Stanislov, Carlos De La Rosa, and Samer Nasser—because the order arranged for the U.S. Marshals Service to serve them.

What happened

In Jones-Bey v. Stanislov, Sister E. Jones-Bey brought a federal-question lawsuit and was allowed to proceed without paying court fees. She is representing herself.

Because Jones-Bey received that permission, the court said she could rely on the court and the U.S. Marshals Service to serve Skarbo Stanislov, Carlos De La Rosa, and Samer Nasser. The court extended the service deadline to 90 days after summonses are issued.

Judge Lorna G. Schofield directed the Clerk of Court to issue the summonses, complete the service forms with the defendants’ addresses, and provide the necessary paperwork to the U.S. Marshals Service. The order did not decide the lawsuit’s underlying claims.

The detailed version

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

Case
Jones-Bey v. Stanislov · No. 1:23-cv-05599
Judge
Lorna Schofield
Date
Aug. 2, 2023

Background

Sister E. Jones-Bey filed this action under the court’s federal-question jurisdiction. She is representing herself. In an order dated July 24, 2023, the court granted her permission to proceed without prepaying court fees.

Service of process

Because Jones-Bey was allowed to proceed without prepaying fees, the court stated that she could rely on the court and the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the defendants. The defendants named in the order are Skarbo Stanislov, Carlos De La Rosa, and Samer Nasser.

The court explained that the usual rule generally requires service within 90 days after the complaint is filed. But a plaintiff proceeding without prepaying fees cannot serve the summonses and complaint until the court reviews the complaint and orders that summonses be issued. The court therefore extended the service period to 90 days after the summonses are issued. If service is not completed within that period, Jones-Bey should request more time. She must also notify the court in writing if her address changes; the court stated that it may dismiss the action if she fails to do so.

Ruling

Judge Lorna G. Schofield instructed the Clerk of Court to issue summonses for all three defendants, complete the U.S. Marshals Service Process Receipt and Return forms with the defendants’ addresses, and deliver all documents needed for service to the U.S. Marshals Service. The Clerk was also instructed to mail Jones-Bey an information package. This order concerned service of the lawsuit and did not decide the merits of her claims.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-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.