Singleton v. East Peoria Police Department et al
Filing
28
ORDER & OPINION entered by Judge Joe Billy McDade on 2/15/2019. It is necessary to set this matter for an evidentiary hearing pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(b)(2). The hearing is set for February 25, 2019, at 1:30 p.m. If Plaintiff is not available at that time or believes he will not be able to gather all necessary evidence by that date, he should file a motion for an extension requesting the hearing be rescheduled. Plaintiff should bring with him to the evidentiary hearing any documents or witnesses he has to prove damages caused by Defendant Bieber's stop and frisk and Defendant Pattersons search of his car. SEE FULL WRITTEN ORDER. (JS, ilcd)
E-FILED
Friday, 15 February, 2019 10:51:16 AM
Clerk, U.S. District Court, ILCD
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
PEORIA DIVISION
LEON J. SINGLETON,
Plaintiff,
v.
JEFFERY A. BIEBER and PATRICK
PATTERSON,
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. 1:15-cv-1503
Defendants.
ORDER & OPINION
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff Leon J. Singleton’s Motion for
Default Judgment (Doc. 27). Plaintiff is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915, the Court performed a merit review on Plaintiff’s
allegations, and found he had stated a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against
Defendants Jeffrey A. Bieber and Patrick Patterson, police officers with the East
Peoria Police Department, for violating his Fourth Amendment rights by illegally
stopping and frisking him and illegally searching his car, respectively. (Doc. 13 at 19).
All other claims and defendants were dismissed. (Doc. 13 at 19).
The matter was then stayed while a state criminal case was pending against
Plaintiff. (Doc. 13 at 19). On May 31, 2018, Plaintiff submitted a status report
showing the state criminal case had been resolved. (Doc. 17). Magistrate Judge
Hawley lifted the stay in a hearing on June 25, 2018. (Doc. 18). Summons issued and
then reissued following an initial error in service. (Docs. 19; 22). The summons were
returned executed on October 23, 2018, with respect to Defendant Patterson and
November 1, 2018, with respect to Defendant Bieber. (Docs. 23, 25).
Also on November 1, Plaintiff filed a motion for default judgment. (Doc. 24).
Because default had not entered, Magistrate Judge Hawley construed the motion as
a motion for default and, although recognizing the motion was premature when filed,
granted default when no responsive pleadings were timely filed. (Docket Entry on
11/26/2018). The Magistrate Judge instructed Plaintiff to file an appropriately
supported motion for default judgment within fourteen days. (Docket Entry on
11/26/2018).
Plaintiff did not do so. However, the Court sua sponte granted Plaintiff an
extension in view of his pro se status and the technical nature of default and default
judgment, allowing him until January 30, 2019 to file “a motion for default judgment
appropriately supported under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55.” (Docket Entry on
1/16/2019). On January 24, 2019, Plaintiff filed the instant motion; Defendants did
not respond.
Plaintiff’s motion is not sufficiently supported for default judgment to issue on
his written submissions. Although Plaintiff attached an affidavit, the affidavit
requests the amount in the Complaint, $100,000, as well as any amount deemed
appropriate for emotional harm, pain and suffering, loss of business income, loss of
enjoyment of life, punitive damages, injunctive or declaratory relief, and attorney’s
fees. (Doc. 27 at 3). There is no indication what the only specific sum—$100,000—
compensates Plaintiff for, nor an indication of the amounts for any of the listed
2
reasons. Moreover, the $100,000 figure appears in Plaintiff’s original Complaint (Doc.
1) and First Amendment Complaint (Doc. 5) as the total amount for all of his claims,
but as some of his claims have been dismissed, that figure is likely inaccurate for the
remaining claims.1
It is necessary to set this matter for an evidentiary hearing pursuant to Federal
Rule of Civil Procedure 55(b)(2). The hearing is set for February 25, 2019, at 1:30 p.m.
If Plaintiff is not available at that time or believes he will not be able to gather all
necessary evidence by that date, he should file a motion for an extension requesting
the hearing be rescheduled. Plaintiff should bring with him to the evidentiary hearing
any documents or witnesses he has to prove damages caused by Defendant Bieber’s
stop and frisk and Defendant Patterson’s search of his car.
SO ORDERED.
Entered this 15th day of February 2019.
s/Joe B. McDade
JOE BILLY McDADE
United States Senior District Judge
The request for relief is absent from his Second Amended Complaint (Doc. 9) which
survived merit review.
1
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?