Donelson v. Atchison et al

Filing 326

ORDER: Plaintiffs Motion for Injunctive Relief (Doc. 322) is DENIED. Signed by Judge Staci M. Yandle on 1/5/2018. (njh)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

CHARLES DONELSON,
Plaintiffs,
vs.
MICHAEL ATCHISON, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 3:14-CV-1311-SMY-RJD

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
YANDLE, District Judge:
Before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion for a Preliminary Injunction (Doc. 322). Plaintiff
Charles Donelson is currently an inmate at Stateville Correctional Center. On November 25,
2014, Plaintiff commenced an action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging several
constitutional violations which occurred while he was an inmate at Menard Correctional Center
(Doc. 1). On January 29, 2015, the Court severed Plaintiff’s claims into separate actions (Doc
18).
On December 4, 2017, summary judgment was entered in favor of Defendants Kevin
Cartwright and George Holton and the John Doe defendants were dismissed (Doc. 317). The
remaining claim against Defendant Baker is set for trial on February 5, 2018:
Count 4: First Amendment claim against Defendant Baker, for refusing to
remedy the unsanitary conditions in Plaintiff’s cell in June 2013 (contamination
with feces and urine), in retaliation for Plaintiff’s grievances over his staff
assaulter classification;
(Doc. 18).
Plaintiff now moves for a preliminary injunction, requiring Sgt. Pork, Lt. Brown, Warden
Pfister, and staff at Stateville Correctional Center, to return his legal property and to grant him

Page 1 of 3

access to the law library and a paralegal (Doc. 322). “The purpose of preliminary injunctive
relief is to minimize the hardship to the parties pending the ultimate resolution of the lawsuit.”
Platinum Home Mortg. Corp. v. Platinum Fin. Group, Inc., 149 F.3d 722, 726 (7th Cir.1998).
“In order to obtain a preliminary injunction, the moving party must show that: (1) they are
reasonably likely to succeed on the merits; (2) no adequate remedy at law exists; (3) they will
suffer irreparable harm which, absent injunctive relief, outweighs the irreparable harm the
respondent will suffer if the injunction is granted; and (4) the injunction will not harm the public
interest.” Joelner v. Village of Washington Park, Illinois, 378 F.3d 613, 619 (7th Cir. 2004).
“A court issues a preliminary injunction in a lawsuit to preserve the status quo and
prevent irreparable harm until the court has an opportunity to rule on the lawsuit’s merits.”
Devose v. Herrington, 42 F.3d 470, 471 (8th Cir. 1994). “Thus, a party moving for a preliminary
injunction must necessarily establish a relationship between the injury claimed in the party's
motion and the conduct asserted in the complaint.” Id. “A preliminary injunction is appropriate
only if it seeks relief of the same character sought in the underlying suit and deals with a matter
presented in that underlying suit.” Welch v. Tritt, 2015 WL 6971312, at *1 (E.D. Wis. Nov. 9,
2015) (citing Kaimowitz v. Orlando, Fla., 122 F.3d 41, 43 (11th Cir.1997)). “[A] District Court
does not have jurisdiction to award a preliminary injunction for an injury unrelated to any cause
of action found in the complaint.” Johnson v. City of Rock Island, Ill., 2012 WL 5425605, at *2
(C.D. Ill. 2012) (citing Stewart v. U.S. I.N.S., 762 F.2d 193, 198 (2d Cir. 1985)); see also Lake v.
Robert, 2014 WL 3610405, at *1 (S.D. Ill. 2014); Jackson v. Welborn, 2013 WL 1287369, at *3
(S.D. Ill. 2013).
Here, Plaintiff has not demonstrated a relationship between the facts and allegations
contained in his motion and those in the Complaint. The allegations in the instant motion

Page 2 of 3

address access to the law library at Stateville Correctional Center, while the allegations of the
Complaint address conditions and the treatment of Plaintiff at Menard Correctional Center.
Moreover, the instant motion asserts allegations against individuals who are not parties to this
case. For these reasons, Plaintiff’s Motion for Injunctive Relief (Doc. 322) is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: January 5, 2018

s/ Staci M. Yandle
STACI M. YANDLE
United States District Judge

Page 3 of 3