Lurch, Jr. v. Pilgrim
- Clarke
- 1:23-cv-06727
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 7
In Lurch, Jr. v. Pilgrim, Judge Clarke ordered address assistance and future service for a self-represented plaintiff; the court did not decide his claims.
Robert Derek Lurch Jr.; Police Officers Pilgrim and Avin; the Corporation Counsel of the City of New York; the Clerk of Court; the United States Marshals Service; and the New York Legal Assistance Group clinic.
What happened
In Lurch, Jr. v. Pilgrim, Robert Derek Lurch Jr. brought a self-represented lawsuit seeking damages from Police Officers Pilgrim and Avin. The court understood the complaint to raise federal civil-rights claims and state-law claims.
The court had already allowed Lurch to proceed without paying court fees. Because the complaint provided enough information for the New York City Police Department to identify the officers’ service addresses, the court ordered New York City’s Corporation Counsel to provide those addresses to Lurch and the court within 60 days.
Judge Jessica G. L. Clarke also stated that the United States Marshals Service would serve the officers after the addresses were provided. The court ordered the Clerk to mail information to Lurch and copies of the order and complaint to Corporation Counsel, and it provided information about a New York Legal Assistance Group clinic for people representing themselves. The order did not decide whether Lurch’s claims were valid.
The detailed version
- Lurch, Jr. v. Pilgrim · No. 1:23-cv-06727
- Clarke
- Sept. 5, 2023
Background
Robert Derek Lurch Jr., who the opinion says was being held at the Otis Bantum Correctional Center on Rikers Island, filed a self-represented lawsuit seeking damages. The court construed the complaint as asserting claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal law allowing certain civil-rights claims against state or local officials, and under state law. The defendants are Police Officer Pilgrim and Police Officer Avin.
The court had previously granted Lurch permission to proceed without prepaying filing fees. The opinion includes a footnote stating that Lurch appeared to have filed the action before he was taken into custody.
Service Addresses
The court explained that a self-represented litigant is entitled to the district court’s assistance in identifying a defendant’s address for service of the lawsuit. The complaint contained enough information for the New York City Police Department to determine the officers’ service addresses.
The court therefore ordered the Corporation Counsel of the City of New York, described as the attorney for and agent of the Police Department, to determine the defendants’ service addresses and provide them to Lurch and the court within 60 days of the order. After the court receives those addresses, it will order the United States Marshals Service to serve the defendants.
Legal Clinic and Clerk’s Directives
The court informed Lurch that he could consult the New York Legal Assistance Group’s clinic for people representing themselves in civil cases in the Southern District of New York. The opinion stated that the clinic is a private organization, is not part of the court, and cannot file documents for him. The order also directed the Clerk of Court to mail Lurch an information package and to mail Corporation Counsel a copy of the order and complaint.
Disposition and Scope
This order addressed case administration and service of process—the formal delivery of the lawsuit to the defendants. It did not decide the merits of Lurch’s federal or state-law claims, and it did not rule on whether the defendants were liable.
Read the full 7-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.