Williams v. Annucci
- Cathy Seibel
- 7:23-cv-06904
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 15
In Williams v. Annucci, Judge Seibel ordered service and identification of unnamed defendants in Williams’s religious-practice lawsuit.
Teddy Williams, the three named defendants, the two unidentified officers, the Clerk of Court, the U.S. Marshals Service, and the New York State Attorney General.
What happened
In Williams v. Annucci, Teddy Williams, who is incarcerated, alleged that prison officials prevented him from attending a Jumah prayer service, violating his constitutional rights and a federal religious-protection law. He is representing himself and was previously allowed to proceed without paying filing fees upfront.
The court ordered the Clerk to issue summonses and have the U.S. Marshals Service serve Anthony Annucci, Captain C. Nixon, and Correctional Sergeant Joseph. The New York State Attorney General must identify the two unnamed officers and provide their badge numbers and service addresses within 60 days; Williams must then file a second amended complaint naming them within 30 days.
Judge Cathy Seibel also referred Williams to a legal clinic for people representing themselves, directed court staff to send him the required forms and information, and warned him to keep the court informed of address changes. The order addressed service and case administration; it did not decide whether Williams’s claims were legally valid.
The detailed version
- Williams v. Annucci · No. 7:23-cv-06904
- Cathy Seibel
- Oct. 13, 2023
Background
Teddy Williams, who is incarcerated at Sing Sing Correctional Facility, brought this self-represented lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He alleges that Anthony Annucci, Captain C. Nixon, Correctional Sergeant Joseph, and two unnamed officers denied him the opportunity 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, a federal law protecting religious exercise in certain institutional settings.
The court had previously allowed Williams to proceed without paying filing fees upfront. Because he was proceeding without a lawyer and without prepaying fees, the court explained that the court and the U.S. Marshals Service would handle service of process—the formal delivery of the lawsuit and summons to the defendants.
Service on Named Defendants
The court directed the Clerk of Court to complete the required U.S. Marshals Service forms, issue summonses, and provide the Marshals Service with the documents needed to serve Annucci, Nixon, and Joseph. The court extended the service period so that the 90-day period would run from the date the summonses were issued. If service was not completed within that period, Williams was instructed to request additional time.
The court also directed Williams to notify the court in writing if his address changes and stated that the action could be dismissed if he failed to do so.
Identifying the John Doe Defendants
Williams had provided enough information for the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision to identify the two unnamed officers involved in the alleged April 14 incident. The court therefore directed the New York State Attorney General, identified in the order as DOCCS’s attorney and agent, to determine the officers’ identities, badge numbers, and addresses where they could be served. That information must be provided to Williams and the court within 60 days of the order.
Within 30 days after receiving the information, Williams must file a second amended complaint using the court’s form and naming the two officers. The second amended complaint will replace, rather than supplement, the original and amended complaints. After it is filed, the court will screen it and, if necessary, direct the Clerk to arrange service on the newly identified defendants.
Other Directions and Disposition
The court referred Williams to the New York Legal Assistance Group’s Pro Se Clinic for possible limited assistance. The order explained that the clinic is a private organization, not part of the court, and that Williams would remain responsible for filing documents and meeting deadlines unless the clinic separately agreed to represent him.
The court directed the Clerk to issue summonses for Annucci, Nixon, and Joseph; send the complaint and order to the New York State Attorney General; provide Williams with the second amended complaint form and an information package; and include the clinic’s materials. This was an order concerning service and case administration. The court did not decide the merits of Williams’s religious-practice allegations or dismiss or resolve his claims.
Read the full 15-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.