Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 25, 2024

Griffin v. Martuscello

Judge
Nelson Roman
Docket
7:23-cv-09810
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
4
Civil RightsSection 1983Pro SeDiscovery
In one sentence

In Griffin v. Martuscello, Judge Roman ordered service and discovery steps in Griffin’s civil-rights lawsuit.

Who this affects

Robert A. Griffin and the six named defendants: Daniel Martuscello, Captain C. Nixon, Sergeant Mandel, Officer J.W. York, Officer Michelle Oscar, and Kristin A. Bailey.

What happened

In Griffin v. Martuscello, Robert A. Griffin, who is incarcerated and representing himself, sued six defendants under a federal civil-rights law. He alleges that they issued a false misbehavior report and violated his rights during the disciplinary hearing that followed.

The court had already allowed Griffin to proceed without paying court fees in advance. It directed the court clerk to issue summonses and prepare the paperwork for the U.S. Marshals Service to serve Daniel Martuscello, Captain C. Nixon, Sergeant Mandel, Officer J.W. York, Officer Michelle Oscar, and Officer Kristin A. Bailey. Griffin must ask for more time if service is not completed within 90 days after the summonses are issued, and he must notify the court if his address changes.

Judge Nelson S. Roman also ordered the defendants to respond within 120 days to the standard prisoner-case discovery requests required by Local Civil Rule 33.2. The order arranged service and discovery; it did not decide whether Griffin’s allegations are valid.

The detailed version

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

Case
Griffin v. Martuscello · No. 7:23-cv-09810
Judge
Nelson Roman
Date
Mar. 25, 2024

Background

Robert A. Griffin, who is incarcerated at Sing Sing Correctional Facility and is proceeding without a lawyer, brought this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal civil-rights law that allows claims concerning violations by state officials. Griffin alleges that the defendants issued a false misbehavior report and violated his rights during the disciplinary hearing that followed.

The named defendants are Daniel Martuscello, identified as the Acting Commissioner of the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision; Captain C. Nixon; Sergeant Mandel; Officer J.W. York; Officer Michelle Oscar; and Kristin A. Bailey.

Service of the lawsuit

The court noted that Griffin had previously been allowed to proceed without paying court fees in advance. Because he was proceeding on that basis, the court directed the Clerk of Court and the U.S. Marshals Service to handle service of the summonses and complaint.

The court instructed the clerk to complete a U.S. Marshals Service Process Receipt and Return form for each defendant, issue the summonses, and provide the Marshals Service with the documents needed for service. The court extended the service period until 90 days after the summonses are issued. If service is not completed within that period, Griffin should request an extension. He must also notify the court in writing if his address changes; the court stated that it may dismiss the action if he fails to do so.

Discovery

The court ruled that Local Civil Rule 33.2 applies. That rule requires defendants in certain prisoner cases to answer specified court-ordered discovery requests. Within 120 days after the order, the defendants must serve responses to the standard interrogatories and document requests, quoting each request verbatim in their responses. Griffin may ask the court’s Pro Se Intake Unit for copies if he cannot access the requests online.

Disposition

The court ordered the clerk to issue summonses and provide the required materials to the U.S. Marshals Service, directed that an information package be mailed to Griffin, and stated that Local Civil Rule 33.2 applies. Judge Nelson S. Roman’s order addressed service and discovery procedures and did not decide the merits of Griffin’s civil-rights allegations.

The authoritative version

Read the full 4-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.