Insley Evans, Sr. v. State of New Mexico, Consuelo Ulibarri and David Cook

D. New Mexico

Insley Evans, Sr. v. State of New Mexico, Consuelo Ulibarri and David Cook

DecidedNovember 14, 2025

Docket1:25-cv-01016

StatusUnknown

This text of Insley Evans, Sr. v. State of New Mexico, Consuelo Ulibarri and David Cook (Insley Evans, Sr. v. State of New Mexico, Consuelo Ulibarri and David Cook) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. New Mexico primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Insley Evans, Sr. v. State of New Mexico, Consuelo Ulibarri and David Cook, (D.N.M. 2025).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO INSLEY EVANS, SR., Plaintiff, v. No. 1:25-cv-01016-JCH-JHR

STATE OF NEW MEXICO, CONSUELO ULIBARRI and DAVID COOK, Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL Pro se Plaintiff, who is proceeding in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915, filed his Complaint using the form “Civil Rights Complaint Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.” Doc. 1, filed October 15, 2025 (“Complaint”). Where the form Complaint prompts plaintiffs to provide facts supporting their claims, Plaintiff wrote “See Attached Exhibits.” There are no exhibits attached to the Complaint. United States Magistrate Judge Jerry H. Ritter notified Plaintiff that: (i) the Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted because there are no factual allegations describing what each Defendant did to Plaintiff; and (ii) it does not appear that the Court has jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s claims against the State of New Mexico based on Eleventh Amendment sovereign immunity. See Order to Show Cause at 3, Doc. 6, filed October 16, 2025. Judge Ritter ordered Plaintiff to show cause why the Court should not dismiss this case and to file an amended complaint and notified Plaintiff that failure to timely show cause and file an amended complaint may result in dismissal of this case. See Order to Show Cause at 7. Plaintiff did not show cause, file an amended complaint or otherwise respond to the Order to Show Cause by the November 6, 2025, deadline. The Court dismisses this case without prejudice because the Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted and because Plaintiff failed to comply with Judge Ritter’s Order to show cause why the Court should not dismiss this case and to file an amended complaint. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) (“the court shall dismiss the case at any time if the court determines that . . . the action . . . fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) (“If the plaintiff fails to prosecute or to comply with these rules or a court order, a defendant may move to dismiss the action”); Gustafson v. Luke, 696 Fed. Appx. 352, 354 (10th Cir. 2017) (“Although the language of Rule 41(b) requires that the defendant file a motion to dismiss, the Rule has long been interpreted to permit courts to dismiss actions sua sponte for a plaintiff's failure to prosecute or comply with the rules of civil procedure or court's orders.”) (quoting Olsen v. Mapes, 333 F.3d 1199, 1204 n.3 (10th Cir. 2003)). IT IS ORDERED that this case is DISMISSED without prejudice.

NU Oa ace RIOT

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO INSLEY EVANS, SR., Plaintiff, v. No. 1:25-cv-01016-JCH-JHR

STATE OF NEW MEXICO, CONSUELO ULIBARRI and DAVID COOK, Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL Pro se Plaintiff, who is proceeding in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915, filed his Complaint using the form “Civil Rights Complaint Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.” Doc. 1, filed October 15, 2025 (“Complaint”). Where the form Complaint prompts plaintiffs to provide facts supporting their claims, Plaintiff wrote “See Attached Exhibits.” There are no exhibits attached to the Complaint. United States Magistrate Judge Jerry H. Ritter notified Plaintiff that: (i) the Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted because there are no factual allegations describing what each Defendant did to Plaintiff; and (ii) it does not appear that the Court has jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s claims against the State of New Mexico based on Eleventh Amendment sovereign immunity. See Order to Show Cause at 3, Doc. 6, filed October 16, 2025. Judge Ritter ordered Plaintiff to show cause why the Court should not dismiss this case and to file an amended complaint and notified Plaintiff that failure to timely show cause and file an amended complaint may result in dismissal of this case. See Order to Show Cause at 7. Plaintiff did not show cause, file an amended complaint or otherwise respond to the Order to Show Cause by the November 6, 2025, deadline. The Court dismisses this case without prejudice because the Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted and because Plaintiff failed to comply with Judge Ritter’s Order to show cause why the Court should not dismiss this case and to file an amended complaint. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) (“the court shall dismiss the case at any time if the court determines that . . . the action . . . fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) (“If the plaintiff fails to prosecute or to comply with these rules or a court order, a defendant may move to dismiss the action”); Gustafson v. Luke, 696 Fed. Appx. 352, 354 (10th Cir. 2017) (“Although the language of Rule 41(b) requires that the defendant file a motion to dismiss, the Rule has long been interpreted to permit courts to dismiss actions sua sponte for a plaintiff's failure to prosecute or comply with the rules of civil procedure or court's orders.”) (quoting Olsen v. Mapes, 333 F.3d 1199, 1204 n.3 (10th Cir. 2003)). IT IS ORDERED that this case is DISMISSED without prejudice.

NU Oa ace RIOT

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Insley Evans, Sr. v. State of New Mexico, Consuelo Ulibarri and David Cook, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/insley-evans-sr-v-state-of-new-mexico-consuelo-ulibarri-and-david-cook-nmd-2025.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack