Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Marin v. St. Charles Parish Sheriff's Office

United States District Court, E.D. Louisiana

October 8, 2014

VICTOR LACAYO MARIN,
v.
ST. CHARLES PARISH SHERIFF'S OFFICE, ET AL., Section

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

DANIEL E. KNOWLES, III, District Judge.

Plaintiff, Victor Lacayo Marin, a federal prisoner, filed this federal civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.[1] In his original complaint, he sued the St. Charles Parish Sheriff's Office and inmate William Stevenson.[2] The undersigned thereafter issued an order informing plaintiff that neither the Sheriff's Office nor Stevenson was a proper defendant and directing him to file an amended complaint.[3] Plaintiff then filed an amended complaint naming Officer Stillenger and the Nelson Coleman Correctional Center as additional defendants. In this lawsuit, plaintiff alleges that Stillenger failed to protect him from an attack by Stevenson.

To better understand the factual basis of plaintiff's claim, the Court held a Spears hearing on September 23, 2014. See Spears v. McCotter , 766 F.2d 179 (5th Cir. 1985). "[T]he Spears procedure affords the plaintiff an opportunity to verbalize his complaints, in a manner of communication more comfortable to many prisoners." Davis v. Scott , 157 F.3d 1003, 1005-06 (5th Cir. 1998). The United States Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has observed that a Spears hearing is in the nature of a Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(e) motion for more definite statement. Eason v. Holt , 73 F.3d 600, 602 (5th Cir. 1996). Spears hearing testimony becomes a part of the total filing by the pro se applicant. Id.

I. Standards of Review

Federal law mandates that federal courts "review, before docketing, if feasible or, in any event, as soon as practicable after docketing, a complaint in a civil action in which a prisoner seeks redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity." 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). Regarding such lawsuits, federal law further requires:

On review, the court shall identify cognizable claims or dismiss the complaint, or any portion of the complaint, if the complaint -
(1) is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted; or
(2) seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief.

28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b).

Additionally, with respect to actions filed in forma pauperis, such as the instant lawsuit, federal law similarly provides:

Notwithstanding any filing fee, or any portion thereof, that may have been paid, the court shall dismiss the case at any time if the court determines that... the action or appeal -
(i) is frivolous or malicious;
(ii) fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted; or
(iii) seeks monetary damages against a defendant who is immune ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.