Laso v. Kimble et al

Filing 32

ORDER REFERRING CASE to Magistrate Judge Stephen C. Williams. Because counsel was appointed for a limited purpose and the purpose has been fulfilled, Attorney Sherman may file a motion to withdraw his representation of Plaintiff within 7 days of the date of this order. If a motion to withdraw is not filed, Attorney Sherman shall continue to represent Plaintiff in this case. Defendant Veath is ORDERED to timely file an appropriate responsive pleading to the complaint and shall not waive filing a reply pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(g).Signed by Judge Michael J. Reagan on 10/17/2012. (tjk)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
EUGENIO LASO, # R74662,
Plaintiff,
vs.
TIMOTHY VEATH,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 3:11-cv-00379-MJR

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Reagan, District Judge:
Plaintiff Eugenio Laso, an inmate in Danville Correctional Center, brings this action for
deprivations of his constitutional rights pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, based on events that
occurred while Plaintiff was housed in Menard Correctional Center (“Menard”). On May 2,
2012 this Court conducted a threshold review of the pro se complaint pursuant to its authority
under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, dismissed all Defendants except one, concluded that a deliberate
indifference claim might lie against the "Unknown Defendant Lieutenant of the Transfer Bus,"
and allowed Plaintiff an opportunity to amend the complaint, aided by counsel. See Doc. 19.
This Court appointed Attorney Steven M. Sherman for the limited purpose of identifying the
"Unknown Defendant Lieutenant of the Transfer Bus." See id. Attorney Sherman filed an
amended complaint on October 4, 2012. See Doc. 30.
After review of the amended complaint (Doc. 30) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, the
Court finds that Plaintiff has stated a claim for deliberate indifference to Plaintiff’s serious
medical needs in violation of the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause of the Eighth

1

Amendment of the U.S. Constitution against Defendant Timothy Veath. Service has already
been issued as to Defendant Veath.
Disposition
Because counsel was appointed for a limited purpose and the purpose has been fulfilled,
Attorney Sherman may file a motion to withdraw his representation of Plaintiff within 7 days of
the date of this order. If a motion to withdraw is not filed, Attorney Sherman shall continue to
represent Plaintiff in this case.
Defendant Veath is ORDERED to timely file an appropriate responsive pleading to the
complaint and shall not waive filing a reply pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(g).
Pursuant to Local Rule 72.1(a)(2), this action is REFERRED to United States Magistrate
Judge Williams for further pre-trial proceedings.
Further, this entire matter is REFERRED to United States Magistrate Judge Williams for
disposition, as contemplated by Local Rule 72.2(b)(2) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), should all the
parties consent to such a referral.
If judgment is rendered against Plaintiff, and the judgment includes the payment of costs
under Section 1915, Plaintiff will be required to pay the full amount of the costs, notwithstanding
that his application to proceed in forma pauperis has been granted. See 28 U.S.C. §
1915(f)(2)(A).
Plaintiff is ADVISED that at the time application was made under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 for
leave to commence this civil action without being required to prepay fees and costs or give
security for the same, the applicant and his or her attorney were deemed to have entered into a
stipulation that the recovery, if any, secured in the action shall be paid to the Clerk of the Court,

2

who shall pay therefrom all unpaid costs taxed against plaintiff and remit the balance to plaintiff.
Local Rule 3.1(c)(1)
Finally, Plaintiff is ADVISED that he is under a continuing obligation to keep the Clerk
of Court and each opposing party informed of any change in his address; the Court will not
independently investigate his whereabouts. This shall be done in writing and not later than 7
days after a transfer or other change in address occurs. Failure to comply with this order will
cause a delay in the transmission of court documents and may result in dismissal of this action
for want of prosecution. See FED. R. CIV. P. 41(b).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: October 17, 2012.
s/ Micheal J. Reagan
Michael J. Reagan
United States District Judge

3