Parker v. Nagy, et al

Filing 20

ORDER DISMISSING THE HABEAS CORPUS PETITION, DENYING PETITIONER'S 3 REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION AS MOOT, AND CLOSING THE CASE. Signed by District Judge Linda V. Parker. (AFla)

Case 2:20-cv-13439-LVP-APP ECF No. 20, PageID.784 Filed 02/15/22 Page 1 of 4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
MICHAEL PARKER,
Petitioner,
v.

Case Number 2:20-cv-13439
Honorable Linda V. Parker

NOAH NAGY and
HEIDI WASHINGTON,
Respondents.
______________________________/
ORDER DISMISSING THE HABEAS CORPUS PETITION,
DENYING PETITIONER’S REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY
INJUNCTION AS MOOT, AND CLOSING THE CASE
On December 7, 2020, Petitioner Michael Parker filed a pro se petition for
the writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (ECF No. 1) and an emergency
motion for a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction (ECF No. 3). In
the alternative, Petitioner sought to frame his pleading as a civil rights action under
28 U.S.C. § 1331. At the time, Petitioner was a 57-year-old Michigan prisoner
who had been sentenced to prison for 15 to 30 years in 2016. (ECF No. 1 at Pg ID
45.)
Petitioner alleged in his habeas petition that his physician had diagnosed him
with stage four colon cancer and that he had been told he had six months to a year
to live. (Id. at Pg ID 48, 52.) Petitioner argued that, due to his communal living
conditions, his age, and his health conditions, he was at a substantial risk of

Case 2:20-cv-13439-LVP-APP ECF No. 20, PageID.785 Filed 02/15/22 Page 2 of 4

becoming ill or dying from COVID-19 and that his continued incarceration
violated his constitutional right to due process. (Id. at Pg ID 44-46.) He sought
release from prison on his own recognizance until the COVID-19 pandemic was
resolved. (Id. at Pg ID 44-45.)
On January 29, 2021, the Court denied Petitioner’s motion for a temporary
restraining order and directed Respondents to file a response to Petitioner’s motion
for a preliminary injunction. (ECF No. 4.) Respondents subsequently filed a
response, opposing Petitioner’s request for relief. (ECF No. 7). Respondents also
moved to file Petitioner’s medical records under seal as part of their response.
(ECF No. 8.) The Court granted Respondents’ motion (ECF No. 9) and sealed
Petitioner’s medical records (ECF No. 12).
Petitioner then asked the Court to defer a ruling on his request for a
preliminary injunction until he could review the discovery materials in this case.
(ECF No. 15.) He claimed that Respondents had failed to send him a copy of the
records that they attached to their response to his motion for a preliminary
injunction. (Id. at Pg ID 732-37.) The Court granted in part Petitioner’s motion to
defer a ruling and ordered Respondents to mail a copy of the records in question to
Petitioner. (ECF No. 17.) On September 10, 2021, Respondents filed a certificate
of service, indicating that they mailed the sealed medical records to Petitioner.
(ECF No. 18.) The Court received nothing thereafter from Petitioner.
2

Case 2:20-cv-13439-LVP-APP ECF No. 20, PageID.786 Filed 02/15/22 Page 3 of 4

On January 4, 2022, Respondents filed a suggestion of death. (ECF No. 19.)
Exhibits attached to the suggestion of death indicate that Petitioner died of colon
cancer with metastasis on November 19, 2021, and that he was discharged on the
same day. (ECF Nos. 19-1, 19-2.)
A federal habeas corpus petition becomes moot on the death of the
petitioner. See Hailey v. Russell, 394 U.S. 915 (1969) (dismissing a motion for
leave to file a habeas corpus petition on the suggestion of mootness due to the
petitioner’s death); accord Scott v. California, 364 U.S. 876 (1960) (dismissing the
petition for a writ of certiorari on the suggestion of counsel for the petitioner of the
death of the petitioner); Rosa v. Rewerts, No. 1:18-CV-940, 2020 WL 132374, at
*1 (W.D. Mich. Jan. 13, 2020) (unpublished decision collecting cases for the
principle that “[t]he death of an inmate during the pendency of his habeas petition
renders the action moot and deprives the Court of jurisdiction”).
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that Petitioner’s habeas corpus petition (ECF No. 1) is
DISMISSED, and his request for a preliminary injunction (ECF No. 3) is
DENIED as moot. This case is now CLOSED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/ Linda V. Parker
LINDA V. PARKER
U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated: February 15, 2022
3

Case 2:20-cv-13439-LVP-APP ECF No. 20, PageID.787 Filed 02/15/22 Page 4 of 4

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was mailed to counsel of
record and/or pro se parties on this date, February 15, 2022, by electronic and/or
U.S. First Class mail.
s/Aaron Flanigan
Case Manager

4