Saunders v. Edward
- Nelson Roman
- 7:23-cv-06370
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Saunders v. Edward, Judge Roman ordered service, discovery responses, and legal-clinic information in Saunders’s due-process lawsuit.
Tori Saunders and defendants Hearing Officer Corley Edward and Officer D. Venettozzi; the order also directs actions by the Clerk of Court and the U.S. Marshals Service.
What happened
In Saunders v. Edward, Tori Saunders, who is incarcerated and proceeding without a lawyer, alleges that Hearing Officer Corley Edward and Officer D. Venettozzi denied him due process during and after a disciplinary hearing. The court had already allowed Saunders to proceed without paying court fees upfront.
The court directed the Clerk to issue summonses and provide the U.S. Marshals Service with the documents and addresses needed to serve Edward and Venettozzi. It also set a 90-day service period beginning when the summonses are issued and applied a local rule requiring the defendants to answer standard discovery requests within 120 days after service.
Judge Roman ordered service, applied Local Civil Rule 33.2, and referred Saunders to the New York Legal Assistance Group for possible limited legal assistance. The order did not decide whether Saunders’s due-process allegations were valid.
The detailed version
- Saunders v. Edward · No. 7:23-cv-06370
- Nelson Roman
- Sept. 14, 2023
Background
Tori Saunders, who is incarcerated at Collins Correctional Facility, filed this action without a lawyer under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Saunders alleges that Hearing Officer Corley Edward and Officer D. Venettozzi denied him due process during and after a disciplinary hearing. The court had previously granted Saunders permission to proceed without paying the filing fee upfront.
This order does not resolve the truth of those allegations or decide whether Saunders will prevail.
Service of the lawsuit
Because Saunders was permitted to proceed without prepaying fees, the court directed the Clerk of Court and the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the summonses and complaint. The Clerk was instructed to prepare service forms, issue summonses for Officers Edward and Venettozzi, and provide the Marshals Service with the paperwork and service addresses listed in the order.
The court stated that service must be completed within 90 days after the summonses are issued. If service is not completed within that period, Saunders should request an extension. The court also required Saunders to notify it in writing if his address changes and stated that the action may be dismissed if he fails to do so.
Discovery
The court applied Local Civil Rule 33.2 to the action. That rule requires defendants in certain prisoner cases to respond to specified court-ordered discovery requests. Edward and Venettozzi must serve responses to the standard interrogatories and document requests within 120 days after service of the complaint, quoting each request verbatim in their responses.
Legal assistance
The court informed Saunders that he may seek limited-scope assistance from the New York Legal Assistance Group’s clinic for people involved in civil cases who do not have lawyers. The order emphasized that the clinic is a private organization and is not part of the court. Any court filings must still be made by Saunders through the Pro Se Intake Unit.
Disposition
Judge Nelson S. Roman ordered the Clerk to issue summonses, complete the service forms, send the necessary materials to the U.S. Marshals Service, and mail Saunders an information package. The court also ruled that Local Civil Rule 33.2 applies and attached the legal clinic’s materials. The order was procedural and did not reach the merits of Saunders’s due-process claims.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.