Williams v. Boland et al

Filing 11

MERIT REVIEW ORDER entered by Judge Michael M. Mihm on 3/22/2018. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT THE CLERK IS DIRECTED TO: 1) ATTEMPT SERVICE ON DEFENDANTS PURSUANT TO THE STANDARD PROCEDURES; AND, 2) SET AN INTERNAL COURT DEADLINE 60 DAYS FROM THE ENTRY OF THIS ORDER FOR THE COURT TO CHECK ON THE STATUS OF SERVICE AND ENTER SCHEDULING DEADLINES. SEE FULL WRITTEN ORDER.(SAG, ilcd)

E-FILED

Thursday, 22 March, 2018 11:41:15 AM
Clerk, U.S. District Court, ILCD
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
ROBERT WILLIAMS,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Plaintiff,
v.
LT. BOLAND, et al.,
Defendants.

No.: 17-cv-1467-MMM

MERIT REVIEW ORDER
Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, pursues a § 1983 action alleging deliberate
indifference to his serious medical needs at the Pontiac Correctional Center (“Pontiac”).
The case is before the Court for a merit review pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. In
reviewing the Complaint, the Court accepts the factual allegations as true, liberally
construing them in Plaintiff's favor. Turley v. Rednour, 729 F.3d 645, 649-51 (7th Cir.
2013). However, conclusory statements and labels are insufficient. Enough facts must
be provided to “state a claim for relief that is plausible on its face.” Alexander v. United
States, 721 F.3d 418, 422 (7th Cir. 2013)(citation and internal quotation marks omitted).
While the pleading standard does not require “detailed factual allegations”, it requires
“more than an unadorned, the-defendant-unlawfully-harmed-me accusation.” Wilson v.
Ryker, 451 Fed. Appx. 588, 589 (7th Cir. 2011) quoting Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678
(2009).
Plaintiff asserts that he is seriously mentally ill (“SMI”) with a history of at least
one suicide attempt. On January 3, 2016, Plaintiff was moved to the Pontiac East House
to cell #920. At that time, Plaintiff asked that Defendant Meyer called a crisis team
1

member as voices were telling him to kill himself. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant
Meyer did not call for the crisis team and actually encouraged Plaintiff to kill himself.
The following day, Plaintiff told Defendant Meyer that he would go on a hunger strike
if not provided treatment. Defendant allegedly told Plaintiff that he would not
document the hunger strike.
On January 4, 2016, Plaintiff told Defendants Grove and Wilson that he needed
mental health intervention. That same day he was seen by Ronald Benner, a Mental
Health Professional (“MHP”). Mr. Benner interviewed Plaintiff who denied feeling
suicidal at that time. He complained, however, that “Dr. G” had discontinued his
medication for no reason. At this time, he had gone over a week without medication
and “voices” were “messing” with him. Plaintiff does not, however, assert a claim as to
Dr. G. Plaintiff told MHP Benner that he would not come off of the hunger strike until
he was seen by Dr. Seeler, the Administrative Director of Mental Health.
On January 4, 2016, at 9:30 a.m., Plaintiff told Defendant Lt. Boland that
Defendant Meyers had refused to call the crisis team or to record the hunger strike. It
should be noted that at this time, Plaintiff had refused only one meal, his breakfast.
Plaintiff claims, however, that another inmate overheard Defendant Boland tell
unidentified officers not to record the hunger strike. Plaintiff was on the
undocumented hunger strike from January 4 through January 6, 2016.
Plaintiff states a colorable claim that Defendant Meyer was deliberately
indifferent in failing to call the crisis team and failing to record the hunger strike.

2

As he asserts that Defendant Boland affirmatively told officers not to record the hunger
strike, the deliberate indifference claim against him will also go forward. Plaintiff’s only
claims against Defendants Grove and Wilson are that he told them he wanted mental
health intervention and he was seen that same day. This fails to state a claim for
deliberate indifference. Defendants Grove and Wilson are DISMISSED.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED:
1.

This case shall proceed solely on the deliberate indifference claims against

Defendants Meyer and Boland, identified herein. If Plaintiff wishes to assert a claim
against Dr. G is to file an amended complaint within 30 days. The amended complaint
must stand complete, on its own, identifying all claims against all Defendants. Any
claims not identified will not be included in the case, except in the Court's discretion
upon motion by a party for good cause shown, or by leave of court pursuant to Federal
Rule of Civil Procedure 15. Defendants Grove and Wilson are DISMISSED.
2.

Plaintiff files motions for recruitment of pro bono counsel [5] [7] and [9].

Plaintiff asserts that he attempted to secure counsel on his ow, but the declination
letters he provides reference case numbers 14-8717 and 07-1298. As a result, the Court
finds that Plaintiff has not made a reasonable attempt to secure counsel, here. Pruitt v.
Mote, 503 F.3d 647 (7th Cir. 2007). [5] [7] and [9] are DENIED at this time. In the event
that Plaintiff renews his motion for appointment of counsel, he is to provide copies of
letters sent to, and received from, prospective counsel for representation in this case.
Plaintiff’s motions for status [6] is rendered moot. Plaintiff files [8] , asserting that one
of his mental health care providers recorded the wrong date on a progress note.
3

Plaintiff asks that the Court change the date on the record. The Court does not have the
authority to undertake such an action and [8] is DENIED. Plaintiff files [9], requesting
that the Court send him copies of this case and three others. Plaintiff does not disclose
what he wants copied and Court will not consider his request as to his other cases.
Furthermore, it is Plaintiff’s responsibility is to keep his copies of anything he files in
this case. [9] is DENIED with leave to renew, identifying those documents he wants
copied.
3.

The Clerk is directed to send to each Defendant pursuant to this District's

internal procedures: 1) a Notice of Lawsuit and Request for Waiver of Service; 2) a
Waiver of Service; 3) a copy of the Complaint; and 4) a copy of this Order.
4.

If a Defendant fails to sign and return a Waiver of Service to the Clerk

within 30 days after the Waiver is sent, the Court will take appropriate steps to effect
formal service on that Defendant and will require that Defendant pay the full costs of
formal service pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(d)(2). If a Defendant no
longer works at the address provided by Plaintiff, the entity for which Defendant
worked at the time identified in the Complaint shall provide to the Clerk Defendant's
current work address, or, if not known, Defendant's forwarding address. This
information will be used only for purposes of effecting service. Documentation of
forwarding addresses will be maintained only by the Clerk and shall not be maintained
in the public docket nor disclosed by the Clerk.
5.

Defendants shall file an answer within the prescribed by Local Rule. A

Motion to Dismiss is not an answer. The answer it to include all defenses appropriate
4

under the Federal Rules. The answer and subsequent pleadings are to address the
issues and claims identified in this Order.
6.

Plaintiff shall serve upon any Defendant who has been served, but who is

not represented by counsel, a copy of every filing submitted by Plaintiff for
consideration by the Court, and shall also file a certificate of service stating the date on
which the copy was mailed. Any paper received by a District Judge or Magistrate
Judge that has not been filed with the Clerk or that fails to include a required certificate
of service will be stricken by the Court.
7.

Once counsel has appeared for a Defendant, Plaintiff need not send copies

of filings to that Defendant or to that Defendant's counsel. Instead, the Clerk will file
Plaintiff's document electronically and send notice of electronic filing to defense
counsel. The notice of electronic filing shall constitute notice to Defendant pursuant to
Local Rule 5.3. If electronic service on Defendants is not available, Plaintiff will be
notified and instructed accordingly.
8.

Counsel for Defendants is hereby granted leave to depose Plaintiff at

Plaintiff's place of confinement. Counsel for Defendants shall arrange the time for the
depositions.
9.

Plaintiff shall immediately notice the Court of any change in mailing

address or phone number. The Clerk is directed to set an internal court deadline 60
days from the entry of this Order for the Court to check on the status of service and
enter scheduling deadlines.

5

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT THE CLERK IS DIRECTED TO:
1) ATTEMPT SERVICE ON DEFENDANTS PURSUANT TO THE STANDARD
PROCEDURES; AND,
2) SET AN INTERNAL COURT DEADLINE 60 DAYS FROM THE ENTRY OF
THIS ORDER FOR THE COURT TO CHECK ON THE STATUS OF SERVICE AND
ENTER SCHEDULING DEADLINES.
LASTLY, IT IS ORDERED THAT IF A DEFENDANT FAILS TO SIGN AND
RETURN A WAIVER OF SERVICE TO THE CLERK WITHIN 30 DAYS AFTER THE
WAIVER IS SENT, THE COURT WILL TAKE APPROPRIATE STEPS TO EFFECT
FORMAL SERVICE THROUGH THE U.S. MARSHAL'S SERVICE ON THAT
DEFENDANT AND WILL REQUIRE THAT DEFENDANT TO PAY THE FULL COSTS
OF FORMAL SERVICE PURSUANT TO FEDERAL RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE
4(d)(2).
_3/22/2018
ENTERED

s/Michael M. Mihm
MICHAEL M. MIHM
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

6