Rodriguez v. Duran

Background

Jose A. Rodriguez brings this self-represented employment-discrimination action under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, the New York State Human Rights Law, and the New York City Human Rights Law. He alleges that his employer discriminated against him because of his age. The court had previously allowed Rodriguez to proceed without paying court fees.

Adding the Employer

The court concluded that Rodriguez could assert claims under the federal age-discrimination law against his employer. In light of his self-represented status and his clear intention to sue the employer, the court construed the complaint as asserting claims against Samaritan Daytop Village and directed the Clerk of Court to add that entity as a defendant under Rule 21 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Service of the Defendants

Because Rodriguez was allowed to proceed without paying court fees, he could rely on the court and the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the defendants. The court directed the Clerk to issue summonses for Samaritan Daytop Village, Elvis Sarita Duran, Ceanna Todisco, and Anaica Allen; complete the required service forms with the defendants' addresses; and deliver the necessary papers to the Marshals Service.

The order states that service must occur within 90 days after the summonses are issued. If service is not completed within that period, Rodriguez should request more time. The court also stated that Rodriguez must notify the court in writing if his address changes and that the action may be dismissed if he fails to do so. The order included information about consenting to receive court documents electronically.

Ruling and Scope

Judge John G. Koeltl ordered the Clerk of Court to add Samaritan Daytop Village as a defendant and to arrange service on all four defendants. The order did not decide whether Rodriguez was discriminated against or otherwise resolve the merits of his claims.