Evans v. Hillgendorf et al

Filing 35

OPINION - Entered by Judge Sara Darrow on 1/19/2017. See written Order. The motion for summary judgment by Defendants Spencer, Smith, and Lee is granted 24 . By January 31, 2017, Plaintiff is directed to notify the Court, in writing, whether he wis hes to continue with this lawsuit. If Plaintiff does not respond, then this case will be dismissed, with prejudice. Also by January 31, 2017, the parties are directed to notify the Court, in writing, whether they desire to engage in a settlement conference before the trial is scheduled on Plaintiff's remaining claims. The clerk is directed to terminate Defendants Spencer, Smith, and Lee. (LN, ilcd)

E-FILED

Thursday, 19 January, 2017 10:59:15 AM
Clerk, U.S. District Court, ILCD

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
CHARLES EVANS,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Plaintiff,
v.
LYNN HILLGENDORF,
BARBARAA KING, STEPHEN
DAMEWOOD, CLIFFORD
SANGSTER, KYLE SPENCER,
OFFICER SMITH, and
PATRICK LEE,
Defendants.

15 -CV-1043

OPINION
SARA DARROW, U.S. District Judge.
On December 5, 2016, the Court denied summary judgment on
Plaintiff’s excessive force claim against Defendant Sangster and on
Plaintiff’s procedural due process claim again Defendants
Hillgendorf, Damewood, and King. The Court reserved ruling on
Defendants’ motion for summary judgment regarding Plaintiff’s
excessive force and failure to intervene claims against Defendants
Spencer, Smith, and Lee. The Court concluded that a review of the
record showed that Plaintiff did not appear to have a viable excessive
force or failure to intervene claim against these Defendants, but
1

Plaintiff, who is no longer in prison, was given until January 4,
2017, to supplement his response. The Court assumes familiarity
with that order.
Plaintiff has not filed a supplemental response to the motion
for summary judgment against Defendants Spencer, Smith, and Lee.
For the reasons stated in the Court’s December 5th order, summary
judgment will be granted to these Defendants. In short, “Plaintiff’s
own deposition testimony indicates that even Plaintiff believes that
these officers were acting in good faith, which would preclude an
excessive force and failure to intervene claim against them.”
(12/5/16 Order, p. 8.)
IT IS ORDERED:
1.

The motion for summary judgment by Defendants

Spencer, Smith, and Lee is granted (24).
2.

Given Plaintiff’s lack of response to the Court’s 12/5/16

order, the Court is unsure whether Plaintiff still intends to pursue
this lawsuit. By January 31, 2017, Plaintiff is directed to notify the
Court, in writing, whether he wishes to continue with this lawsuit.
If Plaintiff does not respond, then this case will be dismissed, with
prejudice.
2

3.

Also by January 31, 2017, the parties are directed to

notify the Court, in writing, whether they desire to engage in a
settlement conference before the trial is scheduled on Plaintiff’s
remaining claims.
4.

The clerk is directed to terminate Defendants

Spencer, Smith, and Lee.
ENTER: 1/19/2017
FOR THE COURT:

s/Sara Darrow
SARA DARROW
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

3