Rizzuto v. Annucci
- Cathy Seibel
- 7:22-cv-07698
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Rizzuto v. Annucci, Judge Seibel directed renewed service on two defendants through the Marshals Service and denied fee-free appeal status.
Rizzuto, Denisha Goodman, Frank Klepeis, the U.S. Marshals Service, the Clerk of Court, and the New York State Attorney General’s Office.
What happened
In Rizzuto v. Annucci, Alfonso Rizzuto is representing himself in a case about events from 2019, when he was incarcerated at Woodbourne Correctional Facility. Earlier service attempts on Denisha Goodman and Frank Klepeis were unsuccessful because the Marshals Service was told they no longer worked there.
The court accepted the New York State Attorney General’s statement that Goodman and Klepeis still work at Woodbourne. It directed the Clerk of Court to prepare the service forms and summonses and send the necessary papers to the U.S. Marshals Service. The court extended the service deadline to 90 days after the summons is issued and corrected Klepeis’s spelling in the case caption.
Judge Cathy Seibel also told Rizzuto to notify the court if his address changes and stated that the case could be dismissed if he does not. The court denied permission to proceed without paying fees for any appeal from this order.
The detailed version
- Rizzuto v. Annucci · No. 7:22-cv-07698
- Cathy Seibel
- Oct. 4, 2023
Background
Alfonso Rizzuto, who is representing himself and has permission to proceed without paying filing fees, brought this action concerning events that occurred in 2019 while he was incarcerated at Woodbourne Correctional Facility. The court had previously ordered service on the named defendants.
The U.S. Marshals Service tried to serve Denisha Goodman and Frank Klepeis but was unsuccessful after personnel at Woodbourne said that neither defendant was still employed there. The court then ordered the New York State Attorney General to provide updated addresses. The Attorney General responded that Goodman and Klepeis are employed at Woodbourne and that service for them would be accepted there.
Court’s directives
The court issued a supplemental order of service. It directed the Clerk of Court to complete a U.S. Marshals Service Process Receipt and Return form for each of Goodman and Klepeis, issue summonses, and deliver the necessary documents to the Marshals Service. The court extended the time for service until 90 days after the summonses are issued.
The court stated that if the complaint is not served within that period, Rizzuto should request an extension of time. It also directed Rizzuto to notify the court in writing if his address changes and stated that the action may be dismissed if he fails to do so. The Clerk was directed to correct the caption by spelling the name Klepeis rather than Klepsis.
Disposition
Judge Cathy Seibel directed the Clerk to mail the order to Rizzuto and send it to the New York State Attorney General’s Office. The court certified that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without paying fees for purposes of an appeal. The order addressed service and related case-management matters; it did not decide the underlying claims.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.