Robinson v. Olive Branch Police Department et al

Filing 24

ORDER. Signed by Magistrate Judge S. Allan Alexander on 4/5/16. Associated Cases: 3:15-cv-00164-MPM-SAA, 3:15-cv-00196-MPM-SAA (jtm)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI
OXFORD DIVISION

ANTHONY ROBINSON

PLAINTIFF

v.

CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:15-CV-164-MPM-SAA
LEAD CASE

DALE K. THOMPSON,
SERGEANT WICKER,
LEANN and DEJAM TAYLOR

DEFENDANTS
CONSOLIDATED WITH

ANTHONY ROBINSON

PLAINTIFF

v.

CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:15-CV-196-MPM-SAA

LT. CHAD WICKER, DALE K.
THOMPSON, DESOTO COUNTY,
JAMES MICHAEL MEZIERE, LEANA,
and DEJUAN TAYLOR

DEFENDANTS

ORDER
Plaintiff filed his complaint in cause number 3:15-cv-196-MPM-SAA on November 12,
2015. Docket 1. On January 15, 2016 the magistrate judge Jane M. Virden entered an order
granting plaintiff’s motion to proceed in this court without prepaying fees and costs. Docket 5.
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d), “[t]he officers of the court shall issue and serve all process” for a
plaintiff proceeding in forma pauperis. See also Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(3)(the court must “order
that service be made by a United States marshal or deputy marshal . . . if the plaintiff is
authorized to proceed in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. § 1915”).
Although the court will relieve plaintiff of the burden to serve process, “it is [his]
responsibility to locate the defendants and submit their addresses to the court.” Shelton v.

Michigan Turkey Producers Co-op., Inc., No. 1:13cv441, 2014 WL 4388366, at *6 (W.D.Mich.
Sept. 5, 2014), citing Byrd v. Stone, 94 F.3d 217, 219 (6th Cir. 1996); see also Boyer v. Taylor,
Civil Action No. 06-694-GMS, 2009 WL 2338173, at *11 (D.Del. July 30, 2009) (“[A] district
court has no duty to assist a plaintiff in locating a defendant’s address for the purpose of service
of process,” citing Barmes v. Nolan, 123 F. App’x 238, 249 (7uth Cir.2005)).
Here, plaintiff provided no addresses for Lt. Chad Wicker, Dale K. Thompson, Desoto
County, James Michael Meziere, Leana Taylor and Dejuan Taylor. It is Mr. Robinson’s
responsibility to provide the proper current or last known address of the defendants in order to
complete service of process. See King v. Busby, 162 F. App’x 669, 671 (8th Cir. 2006) (finding
no abuse of discretion whether the district court failed to complete service of process on a
defendant because plaintiff failed to provide a proper address for the defendant).
Therefore, within fourteen days of the date of this order, the plaintiff must provide to the
district clerk’s office the addresses of, or information sufficient to achieve service of process
upon, each defendant to be served. Once plaintiff provides the clerk’s office with the addresses
of each defendant, the clerk of the court is DIRECTED to issue process for plaintiff, which the
U.S. Marshal will serve in accordance with 28.U.S.C. § 1915(d).
This the 5th day of April, 2016.
____/s/ S. Allan Alexander
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE