Tariq Wyatt v. Municipality of Philadelphia, 17-1168

Plaintiff Tariq Wyatt, a Pennsylvania state prisoner, sued two correctional officers and a mental-health staff member under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for housing him with a dangerous cellmate and failing to respond to complaints, resulting in an assault. He identified defendants only by last name and a "Jane Doe."
Wyatt proceeded in forma pauperis; the Marshals attempted service on the City of Philadelphia, which refused to accept service without defendants’ first names. Wyatt said prison policy prevented him from learning first names.
The District Court dismissed Wyatt’s original complaint under Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m) for failure to effect timely service, without prejudice and with leave to refile once he obtained first names. Wyatt appealed but his appeal was dismissed for failure to file a brief.
Wyatt then sued the City of Philadelphia alone, alleging it violated his access-to-courts rights by refusing to accept service in the prior action and sought the same monetary relief as in the first suit.
The District Court dismissed the new complaint and denied reconsideration; Wyatt appealed to this Court.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Wyatt may sue the City for refusing to accept service in his earlier suit	Wyatt: City's refusal blocked his ability to pursue original § 1983 claims and violated access-to-courts; he seeks damages	City: Remedy lay within the original action (incl. appeal); not a separate claim against the City	Court: Dismissal was improper in these circumstances; case remanded for consolidation and treatment of City as added defendant so original claims can proceed
Whether dismissal under Rule 4(m) was proper where plaintiff lacked defendants' first names due to prison policy	Wyatt: Could not learn first names because of prison policy; dismissal effectively foreclosed his claims	District Court/City: Failure to effect timely service justified dismissal under Rule 4(m)	Court: District Court should have allowed serving the municipal employer (City) given Wyatt sued officials in official capacity; remand to permit service and identification of individuals
Proper procedural handling of Wyatt's separate access-to-courts complaint against the City	Wyatt: Separate suit necessary because City refused service earlier	City: The proper forum was the original case; separate suit improper	Court: Treat the new complaint as supplemental or direct Wyatt to amend the original action to add the City; consolidate actions and serve all defendants

Kentucky v. Graham, 473 U.S. 159 (official-capacity suits treated as suits against the entity)
Wiggins v. Logan, [citation="345 F. App'x 811"] (3d Cir. 2009) (non-precedential; discussed refusal-to-accept-service context)
Parkell v. Danberg, 833 F.3d 313 (3d Cir. 2016) (no respondeat superior liability under § 1983)