Wilson v. Dart et al

Filing 4

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Milton I. Shadur: MEMORANDUM ORDER. Status hearing set for 10/20/2014 at 9:00 AM. Signed by Judge Milton I. Shadur on 9/9/2014. Mailed notice (tlp, ) Modified by the Clerk's Office on 9/10/2014 (rm, ).

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
EASTERN DIVISION
BRANDON L. WILSON,
Plaintiff,
v.
THOMAS J. DART, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 14 C 6886

MEMORANDUM ORDER
Pro se plaintiff prison detainee Brandon Wilson ("Wilson") has employed the
Clerk's-Office-supplied printed form of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 ("Section 1983") Complaint to charge
numerous defendants -- Sheriff Thomas Dart, the CCDOC 1 Medical Staff, Dr. Taylor, 2 an officer
referred to as "Ms. Smith" and a County Jail counselor "K. Smith" -- with the serious
mishandling of Wilson's dental problems. This memorandum order has been occasioned by this
Court's initial screening called for by 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). 3
When Wilson's narrative in his Statement of Claim (Complaint ¶ IV) is credited (as it
must be for current purposes), he certainly advances a claim of at least medical malpractice. 4
More significantly in Section 1983 terms, his detailed allegations go on to describe what, on
1

[Footnote by this Court] "CCDOC" is the often-employed acronym for the Cook
County Department of Corrections, referred to here under its more common name tag of the
"County Jail."
2

That defendant is identified as a County Jail staff dentist.

3

All further references to Title 28's provisions will simply take the form "Section --,"
omitting the prefatory "28 U.S.C. §."
4

For example, Dr. Taylor is alleged initially to have pulled four of Wilson's teeth
without touching the one that was causing him the pain that prompted his visit to the County Jail
dispensary.

further fleshing-out, might at least qualify as the type of "deliberate indifference" actionable
under the seminal Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97 (1976) decision and its numerous progeny. On
another important issue, Wilson advances an arguable predicate for his having satisfied the
exhaustion-of-administrative-remedies requirement that is a prerequisite to suit under 42 U.S.C.
§ 1997e(a). 5
More is needed from Wilson, however, to address his accompanying In Forma Pauperis
Application ("Application"), which he has also submitted on a Clerk's-Office-supplied form. In
that respect he has failed to comply with the requirement of Section 1915(a)(2) so as to permit
the calculation called for by Section 1915(b)(1). In that respect, because of the puzzling delay in
Wilson's handling of his case (although his papers were not stamped "Received" in the Clerk's
Office until September 4, 2014, he had signed the Complaint on July 20 of this year, and the
certificate by the trust fund officer at the County Jail was dated August 1). Accordingly:
1.

Wilson must identify the date on which his Complaint should be deemed
to have been "filed" for Section 1915 purposes. Under the "mailbox rule"
prescribed by Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266 (1988), that means the date
on which he mailed his papers to this District Court or delivered them to
the authorities at the County Jail for such mailing.

2.

Because of the age of the trust fund account printout, it runs only from the
June 4, 2014 date on which Wilson was booked at the County Jail through
August 1. That must be supplemented with information (a) as to the
transactions in his account there to the date of "filing" (as described

5

In any event, that statute is viewed in this circuit as an affirmative defense rather than a
threshold bar, so that its exploration can take place during the course of this litigation.
-2-

above) and (b) as to the transactions in his trust fund account at any other
custodial institution where he was housed during the period that began six
months before that date and ended on June 4, 2014.
Wilson is ordered to provide the necessary information described in the preceding
paragraph on or before October 6, 2014, failing which the Complaint would have to be dismissed
without prejudice. Finally, an initial status hearing is set for 9 a.m. October 20, 2014, with any
previously-served defendant required to make arrangements for Wilson's telephonic participation
in that hearing.

__________________________________________
Milton I. Shadur
Senior United States District Judge
Date: September 9, 2014

-3-