Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Sept. 12, 2023

Haymon v. Annucci

Judge
Cathy Seibel
Docket
7:23-cv-06922
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
15
Civil ProcedureCivil RightsSection 1983Pro Se
In one sentence

In Haymon v. Annucci, Judge Seibel ordered service and identification steps in Alen Haymon’s self-represented civil-rights case over a prison prayer service.

Who this affects

Alen Haymon must pursue service, keep the court informed of address changes, and later file a second amended complaint identifying the two John Doe defendants. Anthony Annucci and Sergeant Joseph are subject to service, while the New York State Attorney General must identify the unnamed officers. The Clerk, U.S. Marshals Service, and New York Legal Assistance Group also have responsibilities described in the order.

What happened

In Haymon v. Annucci, Alen Haymon, who is incarcerated at Sing Sing Correctional Facility, alleges that prison officials denied him the right to attend a Jumah prayer service. He brings claims under the First and Fourteenth Amendments and the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act.

The court directed the Clerk to issue summonses and send the necessary papers to the U.S. Marshals Service so that Anthony Annucci and Sergeant Joseph can be served. It also ordered the New York State Attorney General to identify the two unnamed officers, including their badge numbers and service addresses. Haymon must file a second amended complaint naming those officers after receiving the information.

Judge Cathy Seibel also referred Haymon to a legal clinic for people representing themselves and directed the Clerk to send him related materials. This order addresses service and identifying defendants; it does not decide whether Haymon’s claims are legally valid.

The detailed version

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

Case
Haymon v. Annucci · No. 7:23-cv-06922
Judge
Cathy Seibel
Date
Sept. 12, 2023

Background

Alen Haymon, who is incarcerated at Sing Sing Correctional Facility, filed this self-represented action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He alleges that Anthony Annucci, Commissioner of the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision, Sergeant Joseph, and two unidentified officers denied him the right to attend a Jumah prayer service on April 14, 2023. The complaint asserts violations of the First and Fourteenth Amendments and the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act. The court had previously allowed Haymon to proceed without paying the filing fee in advance.

Service on Annucci and Sergeant Joseph

Because Haymon was allowed to proceed without prepaying fees, the court stated that he may rely on the court and the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the defendants. The Clerk was directed to issue summonses, complete the required service forms with addresses for Annucci and Sergeant Joseph, and send the necessary documents to the Marshals Service.

The court stated that service must occur within 90 days after the summonses are issued. If the amended complaint is not served within that period, Haymon should request an extension. The court also instructed Haymon to notify it in writing if his address changes and warned that the action may be dismissed if he fails to do so.

Identifying the John Doe defendants

The court found that Haymon’s amended complaint provided enough information for the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision to identify the two John Doe defendants involved in the alleged April 14 deprivation. Under Second Circuit precedent, the court explained that a self-represented litigant is entitled to the court’s assistance in identifying a defendant.

The New York State Attorney General was ordered to determine the two officers’ identities, badge numbers, and service addresses and provide that information to Haymon and the court within 60 days. Within 30 days after receiving the information, Haymon must file a second amended complaint naming the officers. That complaint will replace, rather than supplement, the earlier complaints. The court stated that it will screen the second amended complaint and, if necessary, direct the Clerk to prepare service materials for the newly identified defendants.

Legal clinic and disposition

The court referred Haymon to the New York Legal Assistance Group’s clinic for self-represented civil litigants. The order explained that the clinic is a private organization, not part of the court, and that Haymon would remain responsible for filing documents and meeting deadlines.

The court ordered the Clerk to issue summonses and arrange service for Annucci and Sergeant Joseph, directed the Attorney General to identify the two John Doe defendants, referred Haymon to the legal clinic, and directed the Clerk to mail specified materials. The order did not rule on the merits of Haymon’s constitutional or statutory claims. The opinion’s date line contains an apparent typographical error stating “September 12, 2203”; this summary uses the supplied filing date, September 12, 2023.

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.