Douglas v. Snieder et al
Filing
16
MERIT REVIEW OPINION - Entered by Judge Harold A. Baker on 3/14/2018. See written Order. Plaintiff's motion to amend complaint 15 is granted. Clerk is directed to docket the amended complaint attached to plaintiff's motion. The clerk is directed to enter the standard qualified protective order pursuant to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act. The clerk is directed to terminate Defendant Sneider. The clerk is directed to add Howard G. Buffett, the Sheriff of Macon County, Illinois, as a defendant. The clerk is directed to attempt service on Defendants Buffett and Edna pursuant to the standard procedures.(LN, ilcd)
E-FILED
Wednesday, 14 March, 2018 10:49:25 AM
Clerk, U.S. District Court, ILCD
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
AVERS DOUGLAS,
Plaintiff,
v.
THOMAS SNEIDER, et al.
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
16-2288
MERIT REVIEW ORDER
This case is before the court for a merit review of the plaintiff's amended
complaint. The court is required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915A to “screen” 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 “(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.” 28 U.S.C. §
1915A.
In reviewing the amended 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 “state a claim for relief that is plausible on its face.” Alexander
v. U.S., 721 F.3d 418, 422 (7th Cir. 2013)(citation omitted).
Plaintiff alleges that he contracted a MRSA infection while he was detained at
Macon County Jail. Plaintiff alleges that he suffered excruciating pain, that prison
officials ignored his requests for medical treatment, and that any medical treatment he
did receive was inadequate or ineffective. Plaintiff alleges he still suffers from pain as a
result.
Plaintiff’s rights arise under the due process clause of the Fourteenth
Amendment given that he was a detainee at the time of the alleged events. Burton v.
Downey, 805 F.3d 776, 784 (7th Cir. 2015). Plaintiff states a claim for deliberate
indifference to a serious medical need for the alleged failure to treat his infection.
Petties v. Carter, 836 F.3d 722, 729-30 (7th Cir. 2016) (en banc).
Plaintiff does not make any specific allegations against Defendant Sneider, the
alleged chief of police. To the extent that Plaintiff seeks to sue this defendant on the
basis that he is responsible for his subordinate’s actions, he cannot do so. Ashcroft v.
Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 676 (2009). Accordingly, Defendant Sneider will be dismissed.
Plaintiff named Doe defendants, and, therefore, the Court will name Howard G. Buffett,
the Sheriff of Macon County, Illinois, as a defendant solely for purposes of identifying
these defendants. Donald v. Cook Cnty. Sheriff’s Dep’t, 95 F.3d 548, 555-56 (7th Cir. 1996)
(Court may name high level administrators as defendants for purposes of identifying
Doe defendants).
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED:
1) Plaintiff’s motion to amend complaint (#15) is granted. Clerk is directed to
docket the amended complaint attached to plaintiff’s motion.
2) Pursuant to its merit review of the amended complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A,
the court finds that the plaintiff states a Fourteenth Amendment claim for
deliberate indifference to a serious medical need against Defendants Edna and
the unidentified doctor. All remaining Defendants are dismissed. Any
additional claims shall not be included in the case, except at the court’s discretion
on motion by a party for good cause shown or pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 15.
3) This case is now in the process of service. The plaintiff is advised to wait until
counsel has appeared for the defendants before filing any motions, in order to
give the defendants notice and an opportunity to respond to those motions.
Motions filed before defendants' counsel has filed an appearance will generally
be denied as premature. The plaintiff need not submit any evidence to the court
at this time, unless otherwise directed by the court.
4) The court will attempt service on the defendants by mailing each defendant a
waiver of service. The defendants have 60 days from the date the waiver is sent
to file an answer. If the defendants have not filed answers or appeared through
counsel within 90 days of the entry of this order, the plaintiff may file a motion
requesting the status of service. After the defendants have been served, the court
will enter an order setting discovery and dispositive motion deadlines.
5) With respect to a defendant who no longer works at the address provided by the
plaintiff, the entity for whom that defendant worked while at that address shall
provide to the clerk said defendant's current work address, or, if not known, said
defendant's forwarding address. This information shall be used only for
effectuating service. Documentation of forwarding addresses shall be retained
only by the clerk and shall not be maintained in the public docket nor disclosed
by the clerk.
6) The defendants shall file an answer within 60 days of the date the waiver is sent
by the clerk. A motion to dismiss is not an answer. The answer should include
all defenses appropriate under the Federal Rules. The answer and subsequent
pleadings shall be to the issues and claims stated in this opinion. In general, an
answer sets forth the defendants' positions. The court does not rule on the merits
of those positions unless and until a motion is filed by the defendants. Therefore,
no response to the answer is necessary or will be considered.
7) This district uses electronic filing, which means that, after defense counsel has
filed an appearance, defense counsel will automatically receive electronic notice
of any motion or other paper filed by the plaintiff with the clerk. The plaintiff
does not need to mail to defense counsel copies of motions and other papers that
the plaintiff has filed with the clerk. However, this does not apply to discovery
requests and responses. Discovery requests and responses are not filed with the
clerk. The plaintiff must mail his discovery requests and responses directly to
defendants' counsel. Discovery requests or responses sent to the clerk will be
returned unfiled, unless they are attached to and the subject of a motion to
compel. Discovery does not begin until defense counsel has filed an appearance
and the court has entered a scheduling order, which will explain the discovery
process in more detail.
8) Counsel for the defendants is hereby granted leave to depose the plaintiff at his
place of confinement. Counsel for the defendants shall arrange the time for the
deposition.
9) The plaintiff shall immediately notify the court, in writing, of any change in his
mailing address and telephone number. The plaintiff's failure to notify the court
of a change in mailing address or phone number will result in dismissal of this
lawsuit, with prejudice.
10) 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. Marshals 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).
11) The clerk is directed to enter the standard qualified protective order pursuant to
the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act.
12) The clerk is directed to terminate Defendant Sneider.
13) The clerk is directed to add Howard G. Buffett, the Sheriff of Macon County,
Illinois, as a defendant.
14) The clerk is directed to attempt service on Defendants Buffett and Edna pursuant
to the standard procedures.
Entered this 14th day of March, 2018.
/s/Harold A. Baker
_________________________________________
HAROLD A. BAKER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?