Giddings v. United States
- James Oetken
- 1:23-cv-07241
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
Giddings v. United States: Judge Oetken ordered service of Giddings’s FTCA negligence complaint through the Marshals Service after granting permission to proceed without upfront fees.
Warren Mathew Giddings and the United States; the Clerk of Court and U.S. Marshals Service were directed to take steps to serve the complaint.
What happened
In Giddings v. United States, Warren Mathew Giddings, who is incarcerated in Maryland and is representing himself, brought negligence claims under the Federal Tort Claims Act against the United States. The court had previously allowed him to proceed without paying court fees upfront.
Because Giddings received that permission, the court said he could rely on the court and the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the United States. The court extended his service deadline to 90 days after the summons is issued and said he should ask for more time if service is not completed by then.
Judge J. Paul Oetken directed the Clerk of Court to prepare the service forms, issue summonses, provide the necessary paperwork to the Marshals Service, and mail Giddings an information package. Giddings must notify the court if his address changes, and the court may dismiss the case if he does not.
The detailed version
- Giddings v. United States · No. 1:23-cv-07241
- James Oetken
- Dec. 15, 2023
Background
Warren Mathew Giddings, who is incarcerated at Jessup Correctional Facility in Maryland, filed a complaint without a lawyer asserting negligence claims against the United States under the Federal Tort Claims Act. On November 15, 2023, the court granted Giddings permission to proceed without prepaying filing fees.
Service of the Complaint
The order concerns service of process—the formal delivery of the complaint and summons to the defendant—not the merits of Giddings’s negligence claims. Because Giddings was allowed to proceed without prepaying fees, the court stated that he could rely on the court and the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the United States. The court explained that the ordinary 90-day service period could not begin to operate in the usual way because Giddings could not serve the summons and complaint until the court reviewed the complaint and ordered the summons issued.
Order
The court instructed the Clerk of Court to complete the U.S. Marshals Service process forms, mark them for service on the United States, issue summonses, and provide the Marshals Service with the paperwork needed to complete service. The court extended the service period to 90 days after the summons is issued. If service is not completed during that period, Giddings should request an extension of time. The court also directed the Clerk to mail Giddings an information package.
Giddings must notify the court in writing if his address changes. The order states that the court may dismiss the action if he fails to do so.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.