Case 1:00-mc-00308 Document 37 Filed 04/27/12 Page 1 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND
IN RE: *
STATE PRISONER LITIGATION * MISC. NO. 00-308
******
STANDING ORDER 2012-01
In an effort to reduce the costs and improve and expedite the process by which service of
process is obtained in civil rights actions brought by prisoners, this Court—in cooperation with
the Maryland Attorney General, various County Attorneys, and private counsel representing
police officers and corporate health care providers routinely involved in prisoner civil rights
litigation—has devised a mechanism whereby counsel automatically accept service of process
for, and enter an appearance on behalf of, those individuals and entities named in prisoner
complaints.
In recognition of counsel’s need to check payroll records to determine the employment
status of named defendants, and in light of the fact that counsel usually move for (and receive)
extensions of time in which to determine whether service should be accepted and to prepare a
response on behalf of the appropriate defendants, this Court on November 21, 2003, expanded
upon the original Memorandum and Order of March 4, 1992, to provide a procedure whereby all
participating counsel are given automatic extensions of time in which to respond in these cases.
The Court recognizes that most of the County Attorneys as well as counsel for various
police officers and prison contractual health care providers, currently are included in this
process, and will indicate acceptance of service of process for those individuals and entities
named as defendants in civil rights actions typically filed by self-represented detainees, prisoners
and others who have come into contact with law enforcement or corrections personnel and who
Case 1:00-mc-00308 Document 37 Filed 04/27/12 Page 2 of 2
currently are or were employed by their respective clients. An exception shall be made for those
individuals and entities whose insurance contracts and contracts of employment or inclusion in
union bargaining agreements make automatic acceptance of process by others impossible.
Counsel is asked to identify those individuals and entities s/he will represent and those whom
counsel cannot automatically represent by notifying the court of same. Counsel is further
requested to enter her or his appearance each time counsel accepts representation of a defendant.
Accordingly, it is hereby
ORDERED that Administrative Order 2003-7 is rescinded; and it is further
ORDERED that in all cases as set forth above, as well as in all cases brought by prisoners
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983:
1. All defendants for whom service of process is accepted by the Maryland Attorney
General, the County Attorneys, and various private law firms, are deemed to have
filed a motion for extension of time to respond to the complaint, with the response
due no later than sixty (60) days after the date on which counsel first receives a copy
of the complaint. To the extent that counsel accepts service on behalf of one or more
defendants during the early stages of the litigation, then later enters an appearance on
behalf of other defendants who required personal service, the sixty (60) day period
described herein begins to run from the first date on which service was accepted on
behalf of any defendant; and
2. Unless otherwise ordered in a specific case, that motion for extension of time is
granted.
Date: April 27, 2012 ___________/s/___________________
Deborah K. Chasanow, Chief Judge
United States District Court
