Mascio v. Collins et al
Filing
26
ORDER regarding 25 plaintiff Donald Mascio's Request for Status. Signed by Chief Judge David R. Herndon on 6/2/11. (kls2)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
DONALD MASCIO,
Plaintiff,
v.
DONALD COLLINS,
Defendant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
No. 08-cv-294-DRH
ORDER
HERNDON, Chief Judge:
Now before this Court is plaintiff Donald Mascio’s Request for Status (Doc.
25). Plaintiff requests the status of his case. This case was dismissed for failure
to prosecute on April 22, 2010 (Doc. 23). Specifically, plaintiff did not respond to
discovery requests as ordered by the Court. A copy of the dismissal (Doc. 23) was
sent to Pinckneyville Correctional Center, an incorrect address for plaintiff that
was not the most recent address on file. In reviewing this matter, it has come to
the Court’s attention through its own investigation that the most recent address
on file for plaintiff—6421 S. Richmond in Chicago, Illinois—is also incorrect, as
plaintiff is now incarcerated at Danville Correctional Center. The only document
sent to the incorrect address was the order dismissing the case. It is plaintiff’s
responsibility to update the Court with any address change. It is not the Court’s
responsibility to investigate the whereabouts of any party, and ordinarily the
Page 1 of 2
Court would not do so. However, for this one time only, the Clerk is DIRECTED
to change plaintiff’s address to Danville Correctional Center, 3820 East Main St.,
Danville, IL 61834. The Clerk is further DIRECTED to send a copy of this Order
and the April 22, 2010 Order dismissing this case (Doc. 23) to plaintiff at Danville
Correctional Center, and to close this case.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Signed this 2nd day of June, 2011.
Digitally signed by David R.
Herndon
Date: 2011.06.02 11:12:57
-05'00'
Chief Judge
United States District Court
Page 2 of 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?