Cornielis v. City of New York et al
ORDER granting 3 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. The Court grants plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis. Plaintiff's counsel is appointed to serve defendants by mail. See attached. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Marilyn D. Go on 10/23/2012. (Albertsen, Joanne)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - X
- against -
CV 2012-4341 (ARR)(MDG)
CITY OF NEW YORK, et al.,
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
On August 29, 2012, plaintiff filed the instant complaint
against the City of New York, Police Officer Gomez, Commissioner
Raymond Kelly and various unnamed officers, alleging various civil
rights violations in connection with the seizure of his vehicle.
After examining plaintiff's financial affidavit and the allegations
in the complaint, this Court hereby grants plaintiff's application
to proceed in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. § 1915.
When a plaintiff is authorized to proceed in forma pauperis,
the court must order a U.S. Marshal or someone specially appointed
to effect service.
See 28 U.S.C. 1915(d) and F.R.C.P. 4(c)(3).
docket sheet indicates that summonses were issued when the complaint
was filed and, presumably, were given to plaintiff's counsel.
Plaintiff's counsel, as an "office[r] of the court," is hereby
appointed to "serve all process" on the defendants by mail.
U.S.C. § 1915; cf. Fed. R. Civ. P. 1, Advisory Committee Notes on
1993 Amendment (describing attorneys as "officers of the court");
F.T.C. v. Superior Court Trial Lawyers Ass'n, 493 U.S. 411, 453-54
(1990) ("'Attorneys are officers of the Court . . . bound to render
service when required' by court appointment") (quoting Powell v.
Alabama, 287 U.S. 45, 73) (1932)) (J. Blackmun, concurring in part
and dissenting in part).
This Court knows from past experience that
the City of New York and police officers will appear after service
The Court finds that counsel is a suitable person to
perform this function, instead of the Marshals, who also ordinarily
serve process by mail for plaintiffs proceeding in forma pauperis.
See Manson v. Simply Food LIC LLC, 2010 WL 376644 at *2 (E.D.N.Y.
Jan. 26, 2010) (discussing service by mail by Marshals).
counsel not only is quite capable of performing this function, the
Court finds that attorneys are generally better able to monitor
closely whether defendants have been properly served.
v. NASCO, Inc., 501 U.S. 32, 43 (1991) (court has inherent power "to
achieve the orderly and expeditious disposition of cases") (quoting
Link v. Wabash R.R., 370 U.S. 626, 630-31 (1962)).
plaintiff's counsel has difficulty effectuating service, he may so
advise the Court and request appointment of the U.S. Marshal Service
to serve a defendant personally.
Brooklyn, New York
October 23, 2012
MARILYN D. GO
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?