Davis v. Butler et al

Filing 68

ORDER ADOPTING 67 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. The Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Defendants Butler, Keys, Hof, Westfall, Ziegler, and Rubach (Doc. 51 ) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Summary judgment is granted in favor of Defendants Butler, Ziegler, Westfall, and Rubach and against Plaintiff Quinten Davis. The Motion for Leave to Join filed by Defendant Brookman (Doc. 64 ) is DENIED. Magistrate Judge Wilkerson is DIRECTED to recruit counsel to represent Davis at trial and to work with counsel and the parties to select dates for the final pretrial conference and jury trial. Signed by Judge Nancy J. Rosenstengel on 9/19/2018. (mlp)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
QUINTEN DAVIS,
Plaintiff,
vs.
WARDEN KIMBERLY BUTLER,
KENT BROOKMAN, MICHAEL KEYS,
MICHAEL HOF, MAJOR ZIEGLER,
B. WESTFALL, and T. RUBACH,
Defendants.

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

Case No. 3:16-CV-410-NJR-DGW

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
ROSENSTENGEL, District Judge:
Plaintiff Quinten Davis filed this pro se lawsuit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983
against various prison officials for violating his constitutional rights while he was an
inmate of the Illinois Department of Corrections housed at Menard Correctional Center
(Doc. 14). Davis brings one count against all Defendants: a claim that they violated his
Fourteenth Amendment due process rights when he was improperly ticketed and
disciplined for a fight that took place in 2015 (Id.; Doc. 15).
On February 23, 2018, Defendants Butler, Keys, Hof, Westfall, Ziegler, and
Rubach filed a motion for summary judgment, arguing that Davis was afforded all due
process required under the law, that even if there was a due process violation, there is no
evidence Defendants were personally involved in the deprivation, and that qualified
immunity applies (Doc. 51). After two extensions of time were granted, Davis filed a
response to Defendants’ motion on July 13, 2018 (Doc. 63). A month later, Defendant

Page 1 of 3

Brookman filed a motion to join the other Defendants’ motion for summary judgment,
stating he inadvertently was not selected as a filer for Defendants’ motion (Doc. 64). 1
On August 23, 2018, Magistrate Judge Donald G. Wilkerson entered the Report
and Recommendation currently before the Court, which recommends that summary
judgment be denied as to Defendants Keys and Hof, but granted as to Defendants Butler,
Ziegler, Westfall, and Rubach (Doc. 67). Magistrate Judge Wilkerson also recommends
denying the motion for leave to join filed by Defendant Brookman, as it would be futile
based on the conclusions of the Report and Recommendation (Id.).
Objections to the Report and Recommendation were due September 10, 2018.
Because no party has filed an objection, the undersigned District Judge need not
undertake de novo review. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); Johnson v. Zema Sys. Corp., 170 F.3d
734, 741 (7th Cir. 1999). Instead, the Court should review the Report and
Recommendation for clear error. Johnson, 170 F.3d at 739. The Court may then “accept,
reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the
magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
While de novo review is not required here, the Court has reviewed Magistrate
Judge Wilkerson’s Report and Recommendation for clear error. Following this review,
the Court agrees with his findings, analysis, and conclusions. The undersigned
accordingly ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation in its entirety (Doc. 67). The
Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Defendants Butler, Keys, Hof, Westfall, Ziegler,
While Brookman claims he inadvertently was not selected as an electronic filer, the Court notes that the
opening paragraph of the motion itself does not list Brookman as a Defendant moving for summary
judgment (see Doc. 51).

1

Page 2 of 3

and Rubach (Doc. 51) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Summary judgment is
granted in favor of Defendants Butler, Ziegler, Westfall, and Rubach and against
Plaintiff Quinten Davis. The Motion for Leave to Join filed by Defendant Brookman
(Doc. 64) is DENIED.
This case shall now proceed to trial on Count 1 against Defendants Brookman,
Keys, and Hof. Magistrate Judge Wilkerson is DIRECTED to recruit counsel to represent
Davis at trial and to work with counsel and the parties to select dates for the final pretrial
conference and jury trial.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: September 19, 2018
___________________________
NANCY J. ROSENSTENGEL
United States District Judge

Page 3 of 3