Hobes v. Rodriguez
- Philip Halpern
- 7:24-cv-02484
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Hobes v. Rodriguez, Judge Halpern ordered summonses and U.S. Marshals service for Hobes’s constitutional-rights lawsuit.
Joshua Hobes, the eight named defendants, the Clerk of Court, and the U.S. Marshals Service. The defendants must respond to the specified discovery requests after service, while Hobes must monitor service and keep the court informed of any address change.
What happened
Joshua Hobes, who is incarcerated and does not have a lawyer, sued prison officials under a federal civil-rights law, alleging violations of his constitutional rights. The court had already allowed him to proceed without prepaying filing fees.
The court ordered the Clerk of Court to issue summonses and prepare documents so the U.S. Marshals Service could serve A. Rodriguez, Edward Burnett, Kevin Fierro, Ray Lauterett, Jordano Rivera-Padilla, A. Stuetzle, Joseph Bianchi, and Glennis Nelson. Hobes must request more time if service is not completed within 90 days after the summonses are issued.
Judge Philip M. Halpern also ruled that a prisoner-discovery rule applies. The defendants must respond to the specified discovery requests within 120 days after service. The order addressed service and discovery procedures, not whether Hobes’s constitutional claims are valid.
The detailed version
- Hobes v. Rodriguez · No. 7:24-cv-02484
- Philip Halpern
- Apr. 29, 2024
Background
Joshua Hobes brought this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal law that allows claims alleging constitutional violations by state officials. The opinion says Hobes is incarcerated, is proceeding without a lawyer, and was incarcerated at Fishkill Correctional Facility when the alleged violations occurred. The court had granted his request to proceed without prepaying filing fees on April 23, 2024.
Service of the Lawsuit
Because Hobes was allowed to proceed without prepaying fees, the court said he could rely on the court and the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the defendants. The Clerk of Court was instructed to issue summonses, complete the required service forms, and provide the Marshals Service with the documents needed to serve Director of Special Housing A. Rodriguez, Superintendent Edward Burnett, Vocational Supervisor Kevin Fierro, Sergeant Ray Lauterett, and Correction Officers Jordano Rivera-Padilla, A. Stuetzle, Joseph Bianchi, and Glennis Nelson.
The court explained that service must be completed within 90 days after the summonses are issued. If service is not completed in that period, Hobes should request an extension. The court warned that failing to request an extension may result in dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m). Hobes must also notify the court in writing if his address changes, and the court 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 respond to specified court-ordered discovery requests. The defendants must serve responses within 120 days after service of the complaint and must quote each request verbatim in their responses.
Ruling and Effect
The court ordered the Clerk of Court to issue the summonses, prepare the service forms, send the necessary documents to the U.S. Marshals Service, and mail Hobes an information package. The court also confirmed that Local Civil Rule 33.2 applies to the action. Judge Philip M. Halpern did not decide whether Hobes’s constitutional claims have merit in this order.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.