Burgess v. Jones et al

Filing 116

ORDER denying 114 Plaintiff's Motion for temporary restraining order. Signed by Judge Brian J. Davis on 4/2/2019. (KLC)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
OCALA DIVISION
JOHNNY BURGESS
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No: 5:17-cv-131-Oc-39PRL

FNU ROUSE and JONATHAN JORGE,
Defendants.

ORDER
Before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and
Injunction (Doc. 114; Motion). In his Motion, Plaintiff asserts Sergeant Williams and
Lieutenant Dice have threatened him and other inmates assigned to F-dormitory in
retaliation for filing grievances and complaints. See Motion at 2. Plaintiff also states that
Williams and Dice told him “they are going to set [him] up by . . . act[ing] as if plaintiff
attempted to commit suicide” so they can enter his cell to beat him, or they will arrange
to have an inmate with a gang affiliation “do the dirty work for them.” Id. at 3. They also
threatened to have Plaintiff placed on suicide watch so they can remove his belongings,
including his litigation documents. Id.1 As relief, Plaintiff seeks an order enjoining Williams
and Dice from hindering or curtailing his litigation efforts. Id. at 1.
Rule 65 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that a court may issue a
preliminary injunction only on notice to the adverse party, and any order granting

Given the nature of Plaintiff’s allegations, the Court sent a standing order to the Warden
of Santa Rosa Correctional Institution, along with a copy of Plaintiff’s Motion, for any
action that may be warranted. See Order on Emergency Motion (Doc. 115).
1

injunctive relief is binding only on the parties to the action. See Fed. R. Civ. P. (a)(1),
(d)(2). Plaintiff is proceeding on a pro se civil rights complaint against two corrections
officers for conduct that occurred at Lake Correctional Institution. In his Motion, Plaintiff
seeks relief against individuals who are not named Defendants for conduct that occurred
at his current place of incarceration, Santa Rosa Correctional Institution (SRCI). Because
Plaintiff seeks injunctive relief against individuals who are not named Defendants in this
action, he is not entitled to the relief he seeks.
Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Motion is DENIED. To the extent Plaintiff has suffered
constitutional violations at SRCI, he may pursue a civil rights action by filing a new
complaint in a new case.
DONE AND ORDERED at Jacksonville, Florida, this 2nd day of April, 2019.

Jax-6
c:
Johnny Burgess
Counsel of Record

2