Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 16, 2024

Lurch, Jr. v. Doe

Judge
Vernon Broderick
Docket
1:22-cv-02324
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureCivil Rights
In one sentence

In Lurch, Jr. v. Doe, Judge Broderick denied Lurch’s request for help identifying unnamed arrest and transport officers.

Who this affects

Robert Derek Lurch, Jr.’s request to identify unnamed officers was denied; the unnamed officers and existing defendants were affected by the court’s ruling on the identification request.

What happened

In Lurch, Jr. v. Doe, Robert Derek Lurch, Jr. asked the court for another order helping him identify unnamed officers he added as defendants.

He sought the identities of officers who allegedly arrested him on May 9, 2021, and officers who allegedly helped detain and transport him to Bellevue Hospital. Counsel for the City of New York opposed the request.

Judge Vernon S. Broderick denied the request. The court said Lurch provided too little information for the City to identify the officers and did not explain how each officer was involved in the arrest, detention, or transportation.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Lurch, Jr. v. Doe · No. 1:22-cv-02324
Judge
Vernon Broderick
Date
Feb. 16, 2024

Background

Robert Derek Lurch, Jr. asked the court for a second order under a procedure that can assist a plaintiff in identifying unnamed defendants. He sought help identifying two groups of unnamed officers listed in his Second Amended Complaint: officers who allegedly arrested him at 40th Street and 8th Avenue on May 9, 2021, between approximately 7:00 and 7:45 p.m., and officers who allegedly helped detain and transport him. Counsel for the City of New York, representing P.O. Eric Kim and P.O. Amanda Psareas, opposed the request.

Reasoning

The court relied on substantially the same reasons given in its December 13, 2022 order. It found that Lurch had provided limited information that would allow the City of New York to identify the unnamed officers. The court also found that he had not specified how the officers he intended to sue were involved in his arrest, detention, and transportation to Bellevue Hospital.

Ruling

Judge Vernon S. Broderick denied Lurch’s request for the identifying order. The opinion does not state any further disposition of the underlying claims.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.