Edward Bissau Mendy v. Joshua Grant Copeland, et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi directs the Clerk to issue process and the U.S. Marshal to serve four newly added defendants in an in forma pauperis action. The court resolves inconsistencies in the third amended complaint by treating the defendants with provided service addresses as the defendants requiring service. The order was entered after granting leave to amend and explains the plaintiff’s responsibilities concerning service information.

Holdings

1. When a complaint identifies defendants inconsistently, the court may treat as the defendants in the action those defendants consistently identified in the operative pleading and for whom the plaintiff provided service addresses.
2. For an in forma pauperis plaintiff, the Clerk must issue process and the U.S. Marshal must serve process on the properly identified defendants pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915, while the plaintiff remains responsible for providing sufficient information, including a correct address, to secure proper process.

Questions Presented

1. Which defendants identified inconsistently in the third amended complaint should be treated as the newly named defendants for purposes of issuing and serving process?
2. Whether the Clerk should issue process and the U.S. Marshal should serve the newly identified defendants in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1915.

Disposition

other