Kingsberry v. The Department of Corrections in Suffolk County

Filing 8

ORDER granting 2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis; For the reasons set forth above, Plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis is GRANTED and the Court ORDERS service of the Summonses and Complaint upon the Defendants by the USMS. The Clerk of the Court is further ORDERED to serve a copy of the Complaint together with this Order on the Suffolk County Attorney and they are requested to attempt to ascertain the full name of the unidentified Deputy Sheriffs who are d escribed in the Complaint. The Court certifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith and therefore in forma pauperis status is DENIED for the purpose of any appeal. The Clerk of the Court is further directed to mail a copy of this Memorandum and Order to the pro se Plaintiff. So Ordered by Judge Joanna Seybert on 1/5/2016. C/M; C/ECF (Valle, Christine)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
----------------------------------X
NEHEMIAH KINGSBERRY,
Plaintiff,
ORDER
15-CV-5015(JS)(GRB)

-againstDEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS IN
SUFFOLK COUNTY, and DEPUTY
SHERIFFS AT THE CENTRAL ISLIP
COURTHOUSE,

Defendants.
----------------------------------X
APPEARANCES:
For Plaintiff:
Nehemiah Kingsberry, pro se
265 Elmore Street
Central Islip, New York 11722
For Defendants:

No appearances.

SEYBERT, District Judge:
On August 19, 2015, then-incarcerated pro se plaintiff
Nehemiah

Kingsberry

(“Plaintiff”)

filed

an

in

forma

pauperis

Complaint in this Court pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the
Department

of

Corrections

in

Suffolk

County

and

unidentified

“Deputy Sheriffs at the Central Islip Courthouse.”
Plaintiff

did

not

file

the

required

Prisoner

However,
Litigation

Authorization Form (“PLRA”) at the time he filed the Complaint.
Accordingly, also on August 19, 2015, the Court sent Plaintiff a
Notice of Deficiency instructing Plaintiff to complete and return
the PLRA within fourteen (14) days in order to proceed with his
case.

On September 3, 2015, Plaintiff filed the PLRA and also

informed the Court that he was scheduled to be released from the
Riverhead Correctional Facility on September 8, 2015 and provided
a new address.
Upon

review

of

the

declaration

in

support

of

the

application to proceed in forma pauperis, the Court finds that
Plaintiff is qualified to commence this action without prepayment
of the filing fee.

See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1).

Therefore,

Plaintiff’s request to proceed in forma pauperis is GRANTED.
Accordingly,

the

Court

ORDERS

service

of

the

Summonses

and

Complaint upon the Defendants by the United States Marshal Service
(“USMS”).
However, the USMS will not be able to effect service of
the Summonses and the Complaint on the unidentified Defendants
without more information.

The Second Circuit has held that

district courts must provide pro se litigants with reasonable
assistance
defendants.

in

investigating

the

identity

of

such

“John

Doe”

See Valentin v. Dinkins, 121 F.3d 72, 75–76 (2d Cir.

1997) (per curiam).

Accordingly, the Court ORDERS that the Clerk

of the Court serve a copy of the Complaint together with this Order
on the Suffolk County Attorney.

The Suffolk County Attorney’s

Office is requested to attempt to ascertain the full names of the
unnamed Deputy Sheriffs who are described in the Complaint and who
are alleged to have interacted with Plaintiff at the Central Islip
2

Courthouse on May 26, 2015.

The Suffolk County Attorney’s Office

shall provide the Court and Plaintiff the names and addresses where
these individuals can be served within thirty (30) days of the date
that this Order is served upon them.

Once the information is

provided to the Court by the Suffolk County Attorney’s Office,
Plaintiff’s Complaint shall be deemed amended to reflect the full
name of the unnamed Defendants, Summonses shall be issued as to
these Defendants, and the USMS shall serve them.

The Suffolk

County Attorney need not undertake to defend or indemnify any of
these individuals at this juncture.

This Order merely provides a

means by which Plaintiff may properly name and serve the unnamed
Defendants as instructed by the Second Circuit in Valentin.
CONCLUSION
For the reasons set forth above, Plaintiff’s application
to proceed in forma pauperis is GRANTED and the Court ORDERS
service of the Summonses and Complaint upon the Defendants by the
USMS.

The Clerk of the Court is further ORDERED to serve a copy of

the Complaint together with this Order on the Suffolk County
Attorney and they are requested to attempt to ascertain the full
name of the unidentified Deputy Sheriffs who are described in the
Complaint and to provide the names and addresses where these
Defendants can be served to the Court and Plaintiff within thirty
(30) days of the date that this Order is served upon it.
3

Once the

information

is

provided

to

the

Court

by

the

Suffolk

County

Attorney’s Office, Plaintiff’s Complaint shall be deemed amended to
reflect the full name of the unnamed Defendants, Summonses shall be
issued as to these Defendants, and the USMS shall serve them.
The Court certifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3)
that any appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith
and therefore in forma pauperis status is DENIED for the purpose of
any appeal.

See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45,

82 S. Ct. 917, 8 L. Ed. 2d 21 (1962).
The Clerk of the Court is further directed to mail a copy
of this Memorandum and Order to the pro se Plaintiff.
SO ORDERED.
/s/ JOANNA SEYBERT
JOANNA SEYBERT, U.S.D.J.
Dated: January
5 , 2016
Central Islip, New York

4