Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Sept. 11, 2023

Reed v. Annucci

Judge
Cathy Seibel
Docket
7:23-cv-06918
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
15
Civil RightsSection 1983Pro SeCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Reed v. Annucci, Judge Seibel ordered service, help identifying two officers, and clinic information in Reed’s prison-rights case.

Who this affects

Dwayne Reed, Acting Commissioner Anthony Annucci, Sergeant Joseph, the two unidentified correctional officers, the New York State Attorney General’s Office, the Clerk of Court, the U.S. Marshals Service, and the New York Legal Assistance Group Clinic.

What happened

In Reed v. Annucci, Dwayne Reed, who is incarcerated at Sing Sing Correctional Facility, claims that officials denied him the opportunity to attend a Jummah prayer service on April 14, 2023. He sued Acting Commissioner Anthony Annucci, Sergeant Joseph, and two unidentified correctional officers under a federal civil-rights law.

Because Reed was allowed to proceed without paying filing fees, the court directed the Clerk and U.S. Marshals Service to serve Annucci and Sergeant Joseph. The court also ordered the New York State Attorney General’s Office to identify the two unnamed officers and provide their badge numbers and service addresses. Reed must then file an amended complaint naming those officers. The court also provided information about limited assistance from the New York Legal Assistance Group Clinic.

Judge Cathy Seibel issued an order of service on September 11, 2023. The order addressed service and case assistance; it did not decide whether Reed’s allegations were legally valid.

The detailed version

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

Case
Reed v. Annucci · No. 7:23-cv-06918
Judge
Cathy Seibel
Date
Sept. 11, 2023

Background

Dwayne Reed, who is incarcerated at Sing Sing Correctional Facility, filed a self-represented action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal law that allows certain civil-rights claims against state officials. Reed alleges that the defendants denied him the right to participate in a Jummah prayer service at Sing Sing on April 14, 2023. He sued Acting Commissioner Anthony Annucci in his official capacity, Sergeant Joseph, and two unidentified correctional officers: John Doe, Officer in Charge, and John Doe, Escorting Officer.

Chief Judge Laura Taylor Swain had granted Reed permission to proceed without prepaying filing fees. The court also accepted the case as related to an earlier case identified as Brown v. Annucci, No. 23-CV-6056 (CS).

Service on Named Defendants

Because Reed was proceeding without prepaying fees, the court explained that he could rely on the court and the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the defendants. The Clerk of Court was directed to prepare the required service forms, issue summonses, and provide the necessary papers to the Marshals Service for service on Acting Commissioner Annucci and Sergeant Joseph.

The court stated that if the complaint was not served within 90 days after the summonses were issued, Reed should request an extension of time. Reed was also required to notify the court in writing of any address change, and the court warned that the action could be dismissed if he failed to do so.

Identifying the John Doe Defendants

The court found that Reed had provided enough information to allow the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision to identify the two unnamed officers: the officer in charge of Reed’s housing unit on April 14, 2023, and the officer who escorted him to Jummah services that day.

The court ordered the New York State Attorney General, acting as the attorney and agent for the Department of Corrections and Community Supervision, to determine each officer’s identity, badge number, and service address. That information had to be provided to Reed and the court within 60 days of the order. Within 30 days after receiving the information, Reed had to file an amended complaint naming the officers. The amended complaint would replace, rather than supplement, the original complaint. The court stated that it would screen the amended complaint and, if necessary, arrange for service on the newly identified defendants.

Legal Assistance

The court informed Reed that he could seek limited-scope assistance from the New York Legal Assistance Group Clinic, a private organization that assists people without lawyers in civil cases in the Southern District of New York. The court explained that the clinic is not part of the court and cannot file papers for Reed. The order included the clinic’s flyer, retainer agreement, and intake form.

Disposition

The court issued an order of service. It directed the Clerk to issue summonses and arrange Marshals Service for Acting Commissioner Annucci and Sergeant Joseph; directed the New York State Attorney General’s Office to identify the two John Doe defendants; required Reed to file an amended complaint after receiving that information; and provided information about the New York Legal Assistance Group Clinic. The order did not decide the merits of Reed’s claim that he was denied participation in the prayer service.

The authoritative version

Read the full 15-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.