Ambrose et al v. Central Management Services et al

Filing 195

FINAL JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL CASE in favor of Central Management Services, DCFS, Unknown Party, Angeline Stanislaus, Bill Peton, Jennifer Wilson, John Evans, Karen Spilman, Mark Carich, Michael P. Randle, Robert Hilliard, Roger Walker, Salvador Godinez against Unknown Party, Byron Hale, David Tiffany, David Williams, David M Handel, Jerry Smock, Michael Cramer, Paul Reeves, Richard Ambrose, Richard Koempel, Robert Kendall, Strong Eagle, Thomas Cash, William R Williams. Signed by Magistrate Judge Stephen C. Williams on 7/27/11. (amv)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
RICHARD AMBROSE, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
vs.
CENTRAL MANAGEMENT SERVICES,
et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 08-cv-0533-SCW

FINAL JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL CASE
By Order of Court entered by Chief Judge David R. Herndon on March 4, 2009 (Doc. 38), the
Motions to Voluntarily Withdraw filed by Plaintiffs BYRON HALE, THOMAS CASH, RICHARD
KOEMPEL, WILLIAM R. WILLIAMS, and ROBERT KENDALL, were granted and these
Plaintiffs were DISMISSED from this action without prejudice, along with Plaintiff UNKNOWN
PARTY all others similarly situated; Defendants CENTRAL MANAGEMENT SERVICES, JOHN
EVANS, BILL PETON, DCFS AGENTS, ROBERT HILLIARD, JENNIFER WILSON, and
the following UNKNOWN PARTY Defendants: All Guards, Lieutenants, Guards and Supervisors;
All Counties and Municipalities, and Phone Contractors; along with ¶¶ 42 and 44 of Count 1 were ALL
DISMISSED with prejudice.
Pursuant to Stipulation of Dismissal filed on August 18, 2009, as acknowledged by Order of
Court entered by Chief Judge David R. Herndon on August 19, 2009 (Doc. 67), Plaintiff DAVID M.
HANDEL was voluntarily DISMISSED from this action without prejudice.
By Order of Court entered by Chief Judge David R. Herndon on July 1, 2010 (Doc. 114), the
Motions for Summary Judgment filed by Defendants (Docs. 73, 81) were granted and Plaintiffs DAVID
TIFFANY, MICHAEL CRAMER, DAVID WILLIAMS, JERRY SMOCK, STRONG EAGLE,

PAUL REEVES; Defendants KAREN SPILMAN, ANGELINE STANISLAUS; and Plaintiff
Richard Ambrose’s claims of physical assault and deliberate indifference to medical or dental
needs were ALL DISMISSED without prejudice.
Pursuant to Stipulation of Dismissal filed on July 1, 2011, as acknowledged by Order of Court
entered by Magistrate Judge Stephen C. Williams on July 1, 2011 (Doc. 178), all of Plaintiff Richard
Ambrose’s in d iv id u al c ap ac ity claims against Defendants Roger Walker and Michael Randle were
voluntarily DISMISSED from this action without prejudice.
By Order of Court entered by Magistrate Judge Stephen C. Williams on July 21, 2011 (Doc. 188),
the parties Consent Motion to Substitute Party was granted and Defendants ROGER WALKER and
MICHAEL P. RANDLE were dismissed from this action with prejudice; further, all of Plaintiff
Richard Ambrose’s state law claims were DISMISSED from this action without prejudice.
The remaining parties and claims were tried to a jury and the Court, Magistrate Judge Stephen
C. Williams presiding. At the close of Plaintiff Richard Ambrose’s case in chief, by oral Order of Court
entered by Magistrate Judge Steven C. Williams on July 25, 2011, Defendant Salvador Godinez’s Motion
for Judgment as a Matter of Law was granted on the following claims: Count 1—that Defendants
were deliberately indifferent to a significant risk of serious harm to Plaintiff; Count 2—that
Plaintiff was subjected to improper searches; and Count 3—that Defendants were deliberately
indifferent to his serious mental health needs. Accordingly, these Counts were DISMISSED with
prejudice as to Defendant SALVADO R GO DINEZ only, who was DISMISSED with prejudice as a party
to this action. Defendant Mark Carich’s Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law was granted only as
to Plaintiff’s claim for damages in Count 3 and thus, this portion of Count 3 was also DISMISSED with
prejudice.
At the close of all evidence, by oral Order of Court entered by Magistrate Judge Steven C.
Williams on July 26, 2011, Defendant Mark Carich’s renewed Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law

was granted on Plaintiff’s remaining claim for injunctive relief in Count 3. Accordingly, Count 3
was DISMISSED with prejudice.
On July 26, 2011, a Jury Verdict was returned IN FAVOR of Defendant MARK CARICH and
AGAINST Plaintiff RICHARD AMBROSE on the only remaining claim, Count 1—that Defendant
Mark Carich was deliberately indifferent to a significant risk of serious harm to Plaintiff (Doc.
). The Court then entered an oral Judgment IN FAVOR of Defendant MARK CARICH and
AGAINST Plaintiff RICHARD AMBROSE regarding Plaintiff’s request for injunctive relief in Count
1 (Doc. ).
Accordingly, JUDGMENT IS HEREBY ENTERED IN FAVOR of ALL
DEFENDANTS and AGAINST ALL PLAINTIFFS.

IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiffs SHALL recover nothing, and the action be DISMISSED
on the merits; the parties to bear their own costs. Plaintiffs shall take nothing from this action.
Dated this 27th Day of July, 2011.
NANCY J. ROSENSTENGEL, CLERK of COURT
By: /s/ Angie M. Vehlewald
Deputy Clerk

APPROVED: /s/ Ste p h e n C. William s
STEPHEN C. WILLIAMS
United States Magistrate Judge