Opinion
23-cv-1000 JB\JHR
12-09-2024
BRYCE FRANKLIN, Plaintiff, v. KEVIN QUIGLEY, et al, Defendants.
ORDER TO FILE ANSWER AND MARTINEZ REPORT
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff's Prisoner Civil Rights Complaint (Doc. 1-1) (Complaint). Plaintiff is incarcerated and pro se. He alleges, inter alia, that prison officials violated his due process rights by fabricating a misconduct report. See Doc. 1-1 at 3-8. Plaintiff also raises claims for cruel and unusual punishment and violations of state tort law. The Complaint names: (1) Kevin Quigley; (2) John Rich; (3) David Fajardo; (4) German Franco; and (5) the New Mexico Corrections Department (NMCD). Those Defendants have all appeared in this case through counsel, Brenden Murphy.
Having reviewed the matter sua sponte pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, the Court finds the Complaint survives initial review. The Tenth Circuit has previously reversed a screening dismissal where, as here, Plaintiff raised 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims based on the denial of due process in a prison disciplinary proceeding. See Franklin v. Anaya, 2023 WL 6060560, at *1 (10th Cir. Sept. 18, 2023). The Court therefore finds further record development is necessary to adjudicate the claims. Defendants must file an answer to the Complaint within thirty (30) days after entry of this Order. To move the case forward, and in lieu of traditional discovery, the Court will also order a Martinez report. See Hall v. Bellmon, 935 F.2d 1106, 1109 (10th Cir. 1991) (citing Martinez v. Aaron, 570 F.2d 317, 319-20 (10th Cir. 1978) and noting the Martinez report is “a court-authorized investigation and report by prison officials” aimed at ferreting out the “factual or legal bases for [the] claims.”). The Court may use the Martinez report in a variety of procedural situations, including when deciding whether to grant summary judgment. Id. at 1109-13. Plaintiff will be given an opportunity to present conflicting evidence to controvert the facts set out in the report. Id. at 1109.
The Martinez report must address the allegations against Defendants as well as any defenses raised in their answer that they wish to pursue. The report must:
1) include a written brief that discusses Plaintiff's claims. Factual assertions in the briefs must be supported by proof, such as affidavits or documents. See Hayes v. Marriott, 70 F.3d 1144, 1147-48 (10th Cir. 1995). The brief can take the form of a memorandum in support of a summary judgment motion, if Defendants seek summary judgment on the claims;
2) state whether records pertaining to the allegations exist;
3) state whether policies or regulations addressing the allegations exist; and
4) include, as attachments, copies of the relevant records, policies, or regulations. The attachments should be arranged in a logical order and must be properly authenticated by affidavits. See Farmers Alliance Mut. Ins. Co. v. Naylor, 452 F.Supp.2d 1167, 1176-77 (D.N.M. 2006). Any summary judgment brief/memorandum that accompanies the Martinez report must comply with Fed.R.Civ.P. 56.
Defendants must file the Martinez report of record and serve a copy on Plaintiff within seventy-five (75) days after entry of this Order. If Defendants seek summary judgment based on the Martinez report, they must file their motion for summary judgment by the same date. Plaintiff must file his response or objections to the Martinez report within thirty (30) days after Defendants file the report of record. If the Martinez report is accompanied by a motion for summary judgment, Plaintiff's response must also address that motion. Defendants may file an optional reply within fourteen (14) days after Plaintiff files his response.
IT IS SO ORDERED.