Rodriguez v. Palmer

Background

Anthony Rodriguez, who was incarcerated at Clinton Correctional Facility and proceeded without a lawyer, brought an action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He alleged that correction officers at Green Haven Correctional Facility—Tennessee S. Palmer and A. Valle—violated his constitutional rights. An earlier order granted Rodriguez permission to proceed without paying the filing fee upfront.

Service of Process

Because Rodriguez was proceeding without paying fees upfront, the court explained that he could rely on the court and the U.S. Marshals Service to serve the defendants. The court extended the usual service period to 90 days after the summonses were issued, because Rodriguez could not serve the defendants before the court reviewed the complaint and ordered summonses.

The Clerk of Court was directed to issue summonses, complete a U.S. Marshals Service Process Receipt and Return form for each defendant using the listed addresses, and provide the Marshals Service with the documents needed to complete service. Rodriguez was told to notify the court in writing if his address changes; the court stated that the action may be dismissed if he fails to do so.

Discovery

The court held that Local Civil Rule 33.2 applies. That rule requires defendants in certain prisoner cases to answer specified court-ordered interrogatories and requests for production of documents. Palmer and Valle must serve responses to those standard requests within 120 days after service of the complaint and must quote each request verbatim in their responses.

Disposition

The court entered an order directing service and setting discovery procedures. It ordered the Clerk to mail Rodriguez a copy of the order and an information package, and to issue and arrange service of the summonses. The order did not decide whether Rodriguez’s alleged constitutional violations occurred or whether the defendants are liable.