Nowacki v. Malloy et al

Filing 8

ORDER denying without prejudice 5 Motion for Hearing; denying without prejudice 5 Motion for Preliminary Injunction; denying 6 Motion to Appoint Counsel with prejudice to the extent the plaintiff seeks appointment of a U.S. Attorney to prosecute his claim, and denying without prejudice to the extent the plaintiff seeks appointment of an attorney to represent him in this action; denying without prejudice 7 Motion for Order. Signed by Judge Stefan R. Underhill on 09/01/2011. (Carter, J.)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT
MICHAEL NOWACKI,
Plaintiff,
No. 3:11-cv-01242 (SRU)
v.
GOVERNOR DANNEL MALLOY, ET
AL.,
Defendants.
RULING ON PENDING MOTIONS
Michael Nowacki has moved for emergency injunctive relief from restrictions placed
upon him by members of the New Canaan School District and the New Canaan Police
Department barring him from entering the grounds of New Canaan High School. Before a
federal district court may issue a preliminary injunction, the court must first obtain personal
jurisdiction (or authority) over the defendants, requiring, among other things, that they be
properly served with a summons and a copy of the complaint in accordance with Federal Rules
of Civil Procedure 4(a)-(n). See Davis v. Mara, 587 F. Supp. 2d 422, 427 (D. Conn. 2008)
(stating “effective service of process on Defendants is a prerequisite to the Court's exercise of
personal jurisdiction”).
Generally speaking, a summons is a document that names the court and parties involved
in the case, states the time within which the defendant must appear and defend, and is signed by
the clerk. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(a). The summons, along with a copy of the complaint, must be
served on the defendants by a person who is not a party to the action or by a marshal. See Fed.
R. Civ. P. 4(c). Lastly, proof of service must usually be provided to the court. See Fed. R. Civ.
P. 4(l). Unless and until defendants are served in the proper manner, a federal court generally
lacks the authority to issue a preliminary injunction against them.

Here, Nowacki has not served the defendants in the manner required by the Federal
Rules. Therefore, Nowacki’s motions seeking injunctive relief (docs. # 5 and # 7) are DENIED
without prejudice. He may file a motion for a preliminary injunction after he has properly served
the defendants and they have been given an opportunity to respond.
Nowacki has also moved for the appointment of counsel. To the extent Nowacki seeks
the appointment of a U.S. Attorney to prosecute his claims, his motion (doc. # 6) is DENIED
because this court lacks authority to do so. To the extent Nowacki seeks appointment of counsel
to represent him in this action, his motion (doc. # 6) is DENIED without prejudice. His motion
to appoint counsel may be renewed if he petitions successfully for in forma pauperis status. An
application for in forma pauperis status may be obtained from the clerk’s office or through the
court’s website.
It is so ordered.
Dated at Bridgeport, Connecticut, this 1st day of September 2011.

/s/ Stefan R. Underhill
Stefan R. Underhill
United States District Judge

-2-