Manzano v. TrueAccord
- Jesse Furman
- 1:23-cv-08441
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Manzano v. TrueAccord, Judge Furman ordered Marshals service for Manzano’s FDCPA case after granting him permission to proceed without fees.
Donald A. Manzano and TrueAccord; the order directs the Clerk of Court and the U.S. Marshals Service to serve TrueAccord.
What happened
Donald A. Manzano, who is representing himself, sued TrueAccord under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, alleging that TrueAccord violated that law while trying to collect a debt. The court had previously allowed him to proceed without paying filing fees in advance.
Because Manzano was allowed to proceed without prepaying fees, the court said he could rely on the court and the U.S. Marshals Service to serve TrueAccord with the lawsuit. The court also extended the service deadline to 90 days after the summons is issued, rather than 90 days after the complaint was filed.
In Manzano v. TrueAccord, Judge Jesse M. Furman ordered the Clerk of Court to issue a summons, complete the required service forms using TrueAccord’s listed address, and provide the documents to the Marshals Service. The order also directed the Clerk to mail Manzano an information package and warned that he must request more time if service is not completed within 90 days after the summons is issued.
The detailed version
- Manzano v. TrueAccord · No. 1:23-cv-08441
- Jesse Furman
- Oct. 17, 2023
Background
Donald A. Manzano brought this action against TrueAccord under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, alleging that TrueAccord violated the Act while attempting to collect an alleged debt. Manzano is representing himself. In an earlier order dated September 26, 2023, the court allowed him to proceed without prepaying filing fees.
Service of the Lawsuit
The court explained that a plaintiff permitted to proceed without prepaying fees may rely on the court and the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the defendant. The court therefore directed the Clerk of Court to complete a U.S. Marshals Service Process Receipt and Return form for TrueAccord, issue a summons, and provide the Marshals Service with the paperwork needed to serve TrueAccord.
The court stated that the usual 90-day service period runs from the filing of the complaint, but that Manzano could not have served the summons and complaint before the court reviewed the complaint and ordered the summons issued. The court extended the service period to 90 days after the summons is issued. If service is not completed within that period, Manzano should request an extension of time. The court also required him to notify the court in writing if his address changes and stated that the case could be dismissed if he fails to do so.
Disposition
Judge Jesse M. Furman ordered the Clerk to issue the summons for TrueAccord, complete the service forms with TrueAccord’s listed address, and deliver the necessary documents to the U.S. Marshals Service. The Clerk was also directed to mail Manzano an information package. The opinion is an order concerning service of process; it does not decide whether TrueAccord violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.