LUIS ANTONIO MARTINEZ, SR; ANA MARTINEZ DE JESUS; YARITZA MARTINEZ DE JESUS; DEBORA MARTINEZ DE JESUS; ENITH MARTINEZ DE JESUS v. WAYNE COUNTY, MICHIGAN, et al. - Articles

All Content

LUIS ANTONIO MARTINEZ, SR; ANA MARTINEZ DE JESUS; YARITZA MARTINEZ DE JESUS; DEBORA MARTINEZ DE JESUS; ENITH MARTINEZ DE JESUS v. WAYNE COUNTY, MICHIGAN, et al.

Posted by: Azya Thornton on Jun 23, 2025

Court: 6th Circuit Court (Published Opinions)

Attorneys 1: ARGUED: Julie H. Hurwitz, GOODMAN HURWITZ & JAMES, PC, Detroit, Michigan, for Appellants.

Attorneys 2: ARGUED: Jason D. Killips, BROOKS WILKINS SHARKEY & TURCO, Birmingham, Michigan, for Appellees.

Attorneys 3: ON BRIEF: Julie H. Hurwitz, Matthew S. Erard, Huwaida Arraf, GOODMAN HURWITZ & JAMES, PC, Detroit, Michigan, for Appellants.

Attorneys 4: ON BRIEF: Jason D. Killips, Maureen T. Taylor, BROOKS WILKINS SHARKEY & TURCO, Birmingham, Michigan, for Appellees.

Judge(s): GRIFFIN, NALBANDIAN, and MATHIS, Circuit Judges

Court Appealed: United States District Court For the Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit

NALBANDIAN, Circuit Judge. Luis Martinez Jr. died in February 2021 and the Wayne County Medical Examiner’s Office (WCMEO) took control of his body. The WCMEO found his next of kin but inexplicably did not contact them. Meanwhile, the family hired a social worker to find out what happened to Luis Jr. In April 2021, the investigator found him. But by then, his body was in an advanced state of decomposition and had to be cremated. The family sued Wayne County and various state officials under § 1983 alleging a Fourteenth Amendment procedural due process claim, a Monell liability claim, and various state- law claims. The defendants moved to dismiss, and the district court granted the motion. The family appealed. Although it’s clear that the complaint alleges tragically irresponsible conduct by the defendants, that conduct is not a clearly established constitutional violation. And the Monell claim fails on both the lack of a clearly established constitutional violation and a failure to state facts supporting the claim. So we affirm.

Attachments: