Gaston v. McCoy et al
Filing
29
OPINION DENYING MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON EXHAUSTION entered by Chief Judge James E. Shadid on 01/07/2016. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED: 1) Defendants' motion for summary judgment on exhaustion is denied 23 . 2) Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on exhaustion is denied 25 . 3) Defendants' motion to stay discovery is denied 28 . See full written Opinion. (JS, ilcd)
E-FILED
Thursday, 07 January, 2016 03:39:44 PM
Clerk, U.S. District Court, ILCD
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
TERREL GASTON,
Plaintiff,
v.
MICHAEL MCCOY, et al.,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
15-CV-1054
OPINION DENYING MOTION FOR
SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON EXHAUSTION
JAMES E. SHADID, U.S. District Judge.
This case is in discovery on Plaintiff’s claim that the conditions
of the Peoria County Jail violated constitutional standards during
Plaintiff’s detention there. Defendants have filed their second
summary judgment motion on exhaustion, addressing the
questions raised by the Court in denying the first motion for
summary judgment.
Defendants’ supplemental summary judgment motion still
does not carry Defendants’ burden of proving exhaustion. Turley v.
Rednour, 729 F.3d 645, 650 (7th Cir. 2013)(burden of proof of
Page 1 of 3
exhaustion is on the defendants). Plaintiff says he filed requests1
and got no responses. Defendants say they have no record that
Plaintiff filed a request. However, Defendants also concede that a
detainee must turn in all three copies of the triplicate request form.
(d/e 23-1, p. 6.) That means a detainee cannot keep the “pink”
copy of the form before submitting the form, and therefore has no
proof, other than his own testimony, that he filed a request.
Compare with Briseno v. Bukowski, 14-CV-2263 (C.D.
Ill)(dismissing for failure to exhaust where Kankakee County Jail
procedures require a detainee to keep the pink copy before turning
request in, and the plaintiff had not explained why he had no pink
copy). Defendants also do not track the receipt of a grievance from
an officer to its intended recipient, for example, by providing a
signed receipt to the detainee from the officer taking the grievance.
Without some proof of a chain of evidence, Defendants cannot meet
their burden of either demonstrating exhaustion or creating a
disputed fact for an evidentiary hearing. This Court recently
reached a similar conclusion in another case involving IDOC
1
Plaintiff asserts at one point in his complaint that the jail had no grievance procedure, but he then asserts that he
submitted inmate request forms and got no response. Plaintiff may have been confused by the different
terminology used by the IDOC (grievance form) and the jails (request form).
Page 2 of 3
grievance procedures. Daniels v. Hubert, 2015 WL 5734783 (C.D.
Ill. 2015).
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED:
1)
Defendants’ motion for summary judgment on
exhaustion is denied (23).
2)
Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment on exhaustion
is denied (25).
3)
Defendants’ motion to stay discovery is denied (28).
ENTERED: 01/07/2016
FOR THE COURT:
s/James E. Shadid
JAMES E. SHADID
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Page 3 of 3
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?