Trimble v. Grounds et al

Filing 8

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's complaint (Doc. 1) is DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Plaintiff is GRANTED leave to file his First Amended Complaint within THIRTY-FIVE DAYS of ent ry of this Memorandum and Order (January 5, 2015). Should Plaintiff fail to file his First Amended Complaint within the allotted time or consistent with the instructions set forth in this Order, the entire case shall be dismissed with prejudice. (Amended Pleadings due by 1/5/2015). Signed by Judge Staci M. Yandle on 12/1/2014. (tjk)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
VINCENT E. TRIMBLE, #K-92214,
Plaintiff,
vs.
RANDY GROUNDS, DANA TYLKA,
DEE DEE BROOKHARDT,
SUSAN KERR, DR. WILLIAMS, and
DR. SHAH,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 14-cv-1164-SMY

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
YANDLE, District Judge:
Plaintiff Vincent E. Trimble, an inmate currently incarcerated at Robinson Correctional
Center (“Robinson”), brings this civil rights action for deprivations of his constitutional rights
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff claims that Defendants have been deliberately indifferent
to his serious medical needs and also interfered with his legal mail.
Merits Review Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A
This case is now before the Court for a preliminary review of the complaint pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 1915A.

Under § 1915A, the Court is required to promptly screen prisoner

complaints to filter out nonmeritorious claims. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The Court is required to
dismiss any portion of the complaint that is legally frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim
upon which relief may be granted, or asks for money damages from a defendant who by law is
immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b).
An action fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted if it does not plead
“enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.” Bell Atlantic Corp. v.
Page 1 of 4

Twombly, 590 U.S. 544, 570 (2007). A complaint is plausible on its face “when the plaintiff
pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is
liable for the misconduct alleged.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S. Ct. 1937, 1949 (2009). Although
the Court is obligated to accept factual allegations as true, some factual allegations may be so
sketchy or implausible that they fail to provide sufficient notice of a plaintiff’s claim. Brooks v.
Ross, 578 F.3d 574, 581 (7th Cir. 2009). Additionally, courts “should not accept as adequate
abstract recitations of the elements of a cause of action or conclusory legal statements.” Id.
In the present action, Plaintiff asserts multiple claims against six separate Defendants in a
cursory two-page statement of the claim. (Doc. 1). The statement of the claim itself offers little
more than a series of assertions couched as legal conclusions supported by little to no factual
content. The complaint fails to provide even the most basic information such as the date on
which the alleged incidents occurred. Sixty pages of exhibits are also attached to the complaint,
but Plaintiff gives the Court no guidance on which exhibits relate to which claims. In addition,
the exhibits are not organized in any way (i.e., by date, claim, or defendant) that would assist the
court in piecing together Plaintiff’s claims. Although pro se litigants are not held to the same
drafting standards as litigants who are represented by counsel, the Court is not required to scour
60 pages of exhibits to determine whether Plaintiff has indeed stated a claim.

As the United

States Supreme Court has noted:
[T]he pleading standard Rule 8 announces does not require ‘detailed factual
allegations,’ but it demands more than an unadorned, the-defendant-unlawfullyharmed-me accusation. A pleading that offers ‘labels and conclusions’ or ‘a
formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do.’ Nor does a
complaint suffice if it tenders ‘naked assertion[s]’ devoid of ‘further factual
enhancement.’
Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (internal citations omitted). For these reasons, the
Court finds that the complaint, as currently drafted, fails to state a claim in compliance with Rule
Page 2 of 4

8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and should be dismissed. However, the dismissal is
without prejudice to Plaintiff filing an amended complaint that cures the defects noted in this
Order, according to the instructions set forth in the disposition below.
Disposition
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s complaint (Doc. 1) is DISMISSED
without prejudice for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
Plaintiff is GRANTED leave to file his “First Amended Complaint” within THIRTYFIVE DAYS of entry of this Memorandum and Order (January 5, 2015). Should Plaintiff fail to
file his First Amended Complaint within the allotted time or consistent with the instructions set
forth in this Order, the entire case shall be dismissed with prejudice. FED. R. CIV. P. 41(b). See
generally Ladien v. Astrachan, 128 F.3d 1051 (7th Cir. 1997); Johnson v. Kamminga, 34 F.3d
466 (7th Cir. 1994); 28 U.S.C. § 1915A.
Plaintiff is ADVISED that should he decide to file an amended complaint, it is strongly
recommended that he use the forms designed for use in this District for such actions. He should
label the form, “First Amended Complaint,” and he should use the case number for this action.
The amended complaint shall present each claim in a separate count, and each count shall
specify, by name, each defendant alleged to be liable under the count, as well as the actions
alleged to have been taken by that Defendant. Plaintiff should attempt to include the facts of his
case in chronological order, inserting each Defendant’s name where necessary to identify the
actors. Plaintiff should refrain from filing unnecessary exhibits. To enable Plaintiff to comply
with this order, the Clerk is DIRECTED to mail Plaintiff a blank civil rights complaint form.
Plaintiff is FURTHER ADVISED that he should include only related claims in his new
complaint. See George v. Smith, 507 F.3d 605 (7th Cir. 2007) (unrelated claims against different

Page 3 of 4

defendants belong in separate lawsuits). If Plaintiff wishes to avoid severance, and the filing
fees which shall attach, he should limit his amended complaint to claims that are factually and
legally related.
An amended complaint supersedes and replaces the original complaint, rendering the
original complaint void. See Flannery v. Recording Indus. Ass’n of Am., 354 F.3d 632, 638 n. 1
(7th Cir. 2004). The Court will not accept piecemeal amendments to the original complaint.
Thus, the First Amended Complaint must stand on its own, without reference to any previous
pleading, and Plaintiff must re-file any exhibits he wishes the Court to consider along with the
First Amended Complaint. The First Amended Complaint is subject to review pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 1915A.
Plaintiff is further ADVISED that his obligation to pay the filing fee for this action was
incurred at the time the action was filed, thus the filing fee of $350.00 remains due and payable,
regardless of whether Plaintiff elects to file an amended complaint. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1);
Lucien v. Jockisch, 133 F.3d 464, 467 (7th Cir. 1998).
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 seven
(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: December 1, 2014
s/ STACI M. YANDLE
United States District Judge
Page 4 of 4