Garnes v. Pritchard Industries, Inc.
- Paul Engelmayer
- 1:23-cv-10707
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 6
In Garnes v. Pritchard Industries, Magistrate Judge Cave ordered service through the Marshals after allowing Garnes to proceed without prepaying fees.
Mark Garnes, Pritchard Industries, Inc., and Local 32BJ SEIU; the order directs service on the two defendants and sets related requirements for Garnes.
What happened
In Garnes v. Pritchard Industries, Inc., Mark Garnes, representing himself, sued Pritchard Industries, Inc. and Local 32BJ SEIU. He alleges that Pritchard discriminated against him based on race, religion, and national origin and retaliated against him; he also asserts claims involving the union and arbitration.
The court had allowed Garnes to proceed without prepaying filing fees. It ordered the Clerk of Court to prepare the necessary forms and summonses and send them to the U.S. Marshals Service so the Marshals could serve Pritchard and 32BJ. The court also extended the service deadline to 90 days after the summonses are issued, warned Garnes to report address changes, and denied fee-free status for any appeal from this order.
Magistrate Judge Sarah L. Cave issued this service order on December 12, 2023. The order did not decide whether Garnes’s discrimination, retaliation, or arbitration-related claims were legally valid.
The detailed version
- Garnes v. Pritchard Industries, Inc. · No. 1:23-cv-10707
- Paul Engelmayer
- Dec. 12, 2023
Background
Mark Garnes, who is representing himself, brought claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and 42 U.S.C. § 1981 against his employer, Pritchard Industries, Inc. He alleges discrimination based on race, religion, and national origin, as well as retaliation. The court also construed his complaint as asserting claims against Pritchard under the New York State Human Rights Law and the New York City Human Rights Law. Garnes also appears to assert claims against Local 32BJ SEIU concerning his efforts to arbitrate claims against Pritchard.
The opinion states that this was Garnes’s fourth action in the Southern District of New York asserting employment discrimination against Pritchard. The opinion does not decide the merits of the claims in this action.
Order
The court had granted Garnes permission to proceed without prepaying filing fees. Because he was proceeding without prepaying fees, the court ordered the Clerk of Court to complete U.S. Marshals Service process forms for Pritchard and 32BJ, issue summonses, and provide the U.S. Marshals Service with the documents needed to serve both defendants.
The court explained that service must occur within 90 days after the summonses are issued, rather than 90 days after the complaint was filed. If service is not completed within that period, Garnes should request an extension. The court also required him to notify the court in writing if his address changes and stated that the action may be dismissed if he fails to do so.
Disposition
This is a procedural order concerning service of process. The court did not rule on whether Garnes proved discrimination, retaliation, or any claim involving the union. The court certified that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without prepaying fees. Magistrate Judge Sarah L. Cave signed the order.
Read the full 6-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.