Shoulders v. Macorkadale et al

Filing 14

Judge F. Dennis Saylor, IV: ORDER entered denying without prejudice to renewal 13 Motion for Order. The Clerk shall reissue summons for both defendants. (PSSA, 3)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
_______________________________________
CHARLES Q. SHOULDERS,
Plaintiff,
v.
JOHN MACORKADALE, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Civil Action No.
13-10323-FDS

ORDER
SAYLOR, J.
Plaintiff has moved for permission to serve the two defendants, who are correctional
officers at the North Central Correctional Institution at Gardner, by delivering the summons and
complaint at the headquarters of the Department of Correction. For the reasons set forth below,
the motion will be denied without prejudice to its renewal.
The sole defendants in this action are “John” Macorkadale and “John” Waldron. The
Court uses quotation marks around the first names of the defendants because plaintiff states that
he is unsure of the first names of the defendants. When plaintiff filed this action, he asked the
Court for leave to have service completed by the United States Marshals Service or, in the
alternative, to complete service by serving the DOC. The Court granted the motion to the extent
that plaintiff requested service by the USMS and directed plaintiff to provide the USMS with the
defendants’ last names, job titles, and work addresses. See Feb. 28, 2013 Order, ¶ 3.
Plaintiff completed a USM-285 form for each defendant. Although plaintiff indicated in
the “Special Instructions” field or each form that defendants work at NCCI Gardner and

provided their job titles, in the “Serve At” field at the top of the form plaintiff provided the
address of the DOC headquarters in Milford, Massachusetts, rather than the address for NCCI
Gardner. The USMS attempted service on March 27, 2013, at the DOC headquarters; the returns
of service fields on each of the USM-285 forms indicate that service was refused.
Plaintiff again requests that he be able to complete service on the defendants by serving
the DOC. Because plaintiff did not direct the USMS to attempt service at the defendants’ place
of employment, the motion is denied without prejudice to its renewal. The Clerk shall reissue
summons for both defendants and provide the plaintiff with forms for service by the USMS. In
the “Serve At” filed of the form, plaintiff should direct the USMS to attempt service at
defendants’ place of employment, not at DOC headquarters. In the “Special Instructions” field
of the form, plaintiff should provide any relevant information about the defendants (for example,
their job titles). All costs of service will be advanced by the United States. If plaintiff cannot
complete service by this method, he may ask the Court to address the issue at a future time.
So ordered.

/s/ F. Dennis Saylor
F. Dennis Saylor IV
United States District Judge
Dated: April 17, 2013

2