Carter v. Melvin et al
Filing
13
MERIT REVIEW OPINION - Entered by Judge Harold A. Baker on 5/10/2017. The plaintiff's complaint is hereby dismissed with leave to plead over. The plaintiff may file an amended complaint, within thirty (30) days of this order that complies with the Court's instructions above. In short, plead more facts. If the plaintiff fails to file an amended complaint or follow the court=s specific instructions, as outlined in this order, his case may be dismissed. The clerk is directed to provide the plaintiff with a blank complaint form to assist him. Plaintiff's motions 5 7 to have the Court request his trust fund ledgers are denied as moot. The Court requested them on March 20, 2017, see 6 , and received them on March 29, 2017. (Attachments: # 1 Prisoner Pro Se Complaint) (LN, ilcd)
E-FILED
Wednesday, 10 May, 2017 01:58:04 PM
Clerk, U.S. District Court, ILCD
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
JONATHAN T. CARTER,
Plaintiff,
vs.
MICHAEL MELVIN, et al.,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
17-CV-1110
MERIT REVIEW ORDER
The plaintiff, proceeding pro se, and currently incarcerated in Menard
Correctional Center, was granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis. This cause is now
before the court for a merit review of the plaintiff's claims. The court is required by 28
U.S.C. '1915A to Ascreen@ the plaintiff=s complaint, and through such process to identify
and dismiss any legally insufficient claim, or the entire action if warranted. A claim is
legally insufficient if it A(1) is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which
relief may be granted; or (2) seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from
such relief.@
In reviewing the complaint, the Court accepts the factual allegations as true,
liberally construing them in the plaintiff=s favor. Turley v. Rednour, 729 F.3d 645, 649
(7th Cir. 2013). However, conclusory statements and labels are insufficient. Enough
facts must be provided to Astate a claim for relief that is plausible on its face.@ Alexander
v. U.S., 721 F.3d 418, 422 (7th Cir. 2013)(citation omitted). The court set a merit review
hearing in order to allow the plaintiff a chance to personally explain his claims to the
court.
In his complaint, plaintiff makes conclusory allegations that officials at Pontiac
Correctional Center (“Pontiac”) provided inadequate medical care, subjected him to
excessive force and inhumane living conditions, and failed to properly investigate his
claims. Plaintiff does not provide much detail in the body of his complaint. However,
plaintiff stated in open court that in June of 2015, he was diagnosed with H. Pylori and
stomach ulcers and that the medical staff at Pontiac prescribed him the wrong
medication for his condition.
Plaintiff may be able to state a claim, but his allegations are too conclusory for the
court to determine what claims he is currently trying to assert. Furthermore, many of
plaintiff’s alleged claims appear to be improperly joined in the same lawsuit. George v.
1
Smith, 507 F.3d 605, 607 (7th Cir. 2007) (“Unrelated claims against different defendants
belong in different suits.”).
Plaintiff’s complaint is dismissed with leave to replead. Plaintiff’s amended
complaint must state one claim against one set of defendants, and must be a short and
plain statement of the claim for relief. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 8. Any additional claims
plaintiff wishes to pursue must be filed in separate lawsuits, and an additional filing fee
will be assessed for each lawsuit.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that:
1.
The plaintiff=s complaint is hereby dismissed with leave to plead over.
The plaintiff may file an amended complaint, within thirty (30) days of this
order that complies with the Court’s instructions above. In short, plead
more facts. If the plaintiff fails to file an amended complaint or follow the
court=s specific instructions, as outlined in this order, his case may be
dismissed.
2.
The clerk is directed to provide the plaintiff with a blank complaint form to
assist him.
3.
Plaintiff’s motions [5][7] to have the Court request his trust fund ledgers
are denied as moot. The Court requested them on March 20, 2017, see [6],
and received them on March 29, 2017. See [9].
ENTERED this 10th day of May, 2017.
/s/ Harold A. Baker
____________________________________________
HAROLD A. BAKER
United States District Judge
2
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?