Quintana v. Core Civic (C.C.A.)
| Citation | 504 F.Supp.3d 1224 |
| Decision Date | 30 November 2020 |
| Docket Number | No. CIV 18-0233 JB/GJF,CIV 18-0233 JB/GJF |
| Parties | Patrick QUINTANA, Plaintiff, v. CORE CIVIC (C.C.A.) ; Betty Judd; FNU LNU Security Staff; Centurion L.L.C. Medical Staff; FNU LNU Medical Staff; Denise LNU Medical Staff Nurse and FNU LNU all Staff Members, Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of New Mexico |
Patrick Quintana, Santa Rosa, NM, Plaintiff pro se
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Plaintiff Patrick Quintana's Civil Rights Complaint Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1983, filed March 9, 2018 (Doc. 1)("Complaint"). The Court will dismiss the Complaint for failure to state a claim on which relief can be granted. The Court also will grant Quintana leave to file an amended complaint within thirty days of this Memorandum Opinion and Order's entry.
At the time that Quintana filed the Complaint, he was a prisoner incarcerated at the Cibola County Correctional Facility in Grants, New Mexico. See Complaint at 1. The Complaint alleges: (i) "[t]here ha[ve] been many injuries to inmates by Centurion LLC Medical Staff and the record of their actions continues to grow not to mention their intentional (3) deaths from 9-20-17 to 11-18-17"; and (ii) "[a]ll of George Unit Staff along with Medical Staff are part of inmates intentional mistreatment by not allowing the proper medical procedures and medical treatments to be provided which also helped cause (3) deaths done by both Core Civic and [Centurion] LLC Medical Staffs." Complaint ¶¶ A(2)-(3), at 1-2. In support of his individual claims, Quintana alleges that he is diabetic, that he had a hypoglycemic attack in his pod, and that Nurse Denise gave him one-half of a tube of glucose, but Denise did not "C.B.G. with the glucose monitor and just left me to suffer." Complaint ¶ B(1), at 2. Quintana alleges that Denise did not follow medical procedures, but instead followed the orders of Core Civic security staff members. See Complaint ¶ B(1), at 2.
Quintana raises three counts in his Complaint:
Complaint ¶¶ C(1)(A)-(C), at 3-4. In his prayer for relief, Quintana requests:
$1,800 a day for everyday I've spent here suffering under said circumstances. I want all Core Civic Staff Members charged tried and convicted to the fullest. $5,000 from each Core Civic Member for Malice and Callouse indifference actions/or inactions. [Centurion] Medical Staff to all be charged tried and convicted with all their lisenses barred never to work in the medical field to hurt another human being.
Complaint ¶ E(1), at 5. In an attachment to the Complaint, Quintana alleges that his hypoglycemic event occurred on February 28, 2018, and that, when Denise began to administer the one-half tube of glucose, Quintana became verbally and physically uncooperative and abusive. See 2-28-18 Attachment at 7, filed March 9, 2018 (Doc 1)("Attachment"). The Attachment states that, on March 1, 2018, when Quintana returned from "Workers Reck," he was in the "pm med line" and, when he got his medications, he tried to speak to Nurse Denise and apologize for being rude during his hypoglycemic attack. Attachment at 7. In the Attachment, Quintana alleges that Denise told him that he is not diabetic and does not take insulin, and there was nothing wrong with him. See Attachment at 7. In the Attachment, Quintana alleges that Ms. Platero was on duty and was present when Denise told him there was nothing wrong with him. See Attachment at 7.
Since the filing of his Complaint, Quintana has submitted sixteen supplements, appendices, notices, and letters. See Appendix/Supplement, filed April 24, 2018 (Doc. 8)("Appendix/Supplement I"); Notice of Order of Cease and Desist, filed April 30, 2018 (Doc. 9), Relief Appendix/Supplement, filed May 4, 2018 (Doc. 10); Appendix/Supplement, filed May 9, 2018 (Doc. 11)("Appendix/Supplement II"); Accountant Representative Letter, filed May 21, 2018 (Doc. 12); Letter, filed May 25, 2018 (Doc. 14)("Letter I"); Letter, filed June 4, 2018 (Doc. 15) ("Letter II"); Letter, filed June 13, 2018 (Doc. 17)("Letter III"); Letter, filed June 22, 2018 (Doc. 18)("Letter IV"); Notice of New Relief, filed July 2, 2018 (Doc. 19); Appendix/Supplement, filed August 1, 2018 (Doc. 21); Appendix/Supplement, filed August 21, 2018 (Doc. 23)("Appendix/Supplement III"); Amendment Letter, filed October 10, 2018 (Doc. 26)("Amendment Letter I"); Amendment Letter, filed October 12, 2018 (Doc. 27) ("Amendment Letter II"); Amendment Letter, filed October 26, 2018 (Doc. 28)("Amendment Letter III"); Notice of Change of Address, filed November 16, 2018 (Doc. 30). In his subsequent filings, Quintana raises a variety of issues, including a claim that, on April 21, 2018, Platero was rude to him and, although he did get his medications, she attempted to make him leave without getting them, see Appendix/Supplement I at 1, and an allegation that a Dr. Deming is trying to wean him off of glucose and he wants his medications restarted, see Notice of New Relief at 1-2. Last, Quintana also notified the Court that he is no longer incarcerated at the Cibola County Correctional Facility, in Grants, New Mexico but, instead, is now housed at the Guadalupe County Correctional Facility, Santa Rosa, New Mexico. See Notice of Change of Address at 1.
Plaintiff Quintana is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis. See Order Granting Leave to Proceed Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(B), and to Make Payments or Show Cause, filed March 30, 2018 (Doc. 6). The Court has the discretion to dismiss an in forma pauperis complaint sua sponte for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted either under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). A claim should be dismissed where it is legally or factually insufficient to state a plausible claim for relief. See Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 167 L.Ed.2d 929 (2007).
Under rule 12(b)(6), the Court must accept all well-pled factual allegations, but not conclusory, unsupported allegations, and may not consider matters outside the pleading. See Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555, 127 S.Ct. 1955 ; Dunn v. White, 880 F.2d 1188, 1190 (10th Cir. 1989). The Court may dismiss a complaint under rule 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim if "it is ‘patently obvious’ that the plaintiff could not prevail on the facts alleged." Hall v. Bellmon, 935 F.2d 1106, 1109 (10th Cir. 1991) (quoting McKinney v. Oklahoma Dep't of Human Services, 925 F.2d 363, 365 (10th Cir. 1991) ). A plaintiff must allege "enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face." Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. at 570, 127 S.Ct. 1955.
Under § 1915(e)(2)(B), a court may dismiss the complaint at any time if the court determines the action fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(2). The authority granted by § 1915 permits the court the unusual power to pierce the veil of the complaint's factual allegations and dismiss those claims whose factual contentions are clearly baseless. Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 327, 109 S.Ct. 1827, 104 L.Ed.2d 338 (1989). See also Hall v. Bellmon, 935 F.2d at 1109. The authority to "pierce the veil of the complaint's factual allegations" means that a court is not bound, as it usually is when making a determination based solely on the pleadings, to accept without question the truth of the plaintiff's allegations. Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 32-33, 112 S.Ct. 1728, 118 L.Ed.2d 340 (1992). The court is not required to accept the truth of the plaintiff's allegations but, instead, may go beyond the pleadings and consider any other materials filed by the parties, as well as court proceedings subject to judicial notice. Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. at 32-33, 112 S.Ct. 1728.
In reviewing a pro se complaint, the Court liberally construes the factual allegations. See Northington v. Jackson, 973 F.2d 1518, 1520-21 (10th Cir. 1992). A pro se plaintiff's pleadings are judged by the same legal standards that apply to all litigants, however, and a pro se plaintiff must abide by the applicable rules of court. See Ogden v. San Juan County, 32 F.3d 452, 455 (10th Cir. 1994). The court is not obligated to craft legal theories for the plaintiff or to supply factual allegations to support the plaintiff's claims. See Hall v. Bellmon, 935 F.2d at 1110. Nor may the court assume the role of advocate for the pro se litigant. See Hall v. Bellmon, 935 F.2d at 1110.
In deciding whether to dismiss the complaint, in whole or in part, the court is to consider whether to allow the plaintiff an opportunity to amend the complaint. See Reynoldson v. Shillinger, 907 F.2d 124, 126 (10th Cir. 1990). Pro se plaintiffs should be given a reasonable opportunity to remedy defects in their pleadings. See Reynoldson v. Shillinger, 907 F.2d at 126. The opportunity to amend should be granted unless amendment would be futile. See Hall v. Bellmon, 935 F.2d at 1109. An...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Fudge v. Martinez
-
Gatlin v. CoreCivic, Inc.
...LLC and CoreCivic vicariously liable for their employees' actions under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.” See Quintana v. CoreCivic (C.C.A.), 504 F.Supp.3d 1224, 1236 (D.N.M. 2020). “Where, as in this case, a corporate entity is performing the actions typically performed by a state or municipality, like o......