Wiggins v. Baldwin et al

Filing 94

ORDER SEVERING CASE re 89 MOTION for Leave to File Supplemental Petition Complaint, 90 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis, MOTION to Appoint Counsel filed by Malcolm Wiggins, 91 MOTION to Appoint Counsel, 92 MOTION for Tem porary Restraining Order MOTION for Preliminary Injunction filed by Malcolm Wiggins. The Court DIRECTS the Clerk to sever the claims raised in plaintiff's 89 Motion to File Supplemental Petition and the aforementioned documents 90 , 91 and 92 and file them in a new case bearing a new case number. Signed by Judge David R. Herndon on 2/9/2018. (lmp)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS MALCOLM WIGGINS, Plaintiff, v. JOHN BALDWIN, JOSEPH YURKOVICH, ALFONSO DAVID, DR. APOSTLE, TAMMY PITTAYATHIHAN, JEFFREY DENNISON, UNKNOWN PARTY, JOHN DOE, and UNKNOWN ORANGE CRUSH MEMBER, Defendants. HERNDON, District Judge: Case No. 17-cv-583-DRH-DGW ORDER Pending before the Court are Plaintiff Malcolm Wiggins’ Motion for Leave to File Supplemental Petition (Doc. 89), Motion for Leave to Proceed in Forma Pauperis (Doc. 90), Motion for Appointment of Counsel (Doc. 91) and Motion for Temporary Restraining Order (Doc. 92). The Court has reviewed the Motion for Leave to File Supplemental Petition and finds it raises unrelated legal claims against new defendants. Despite being titled as a “supplemental petition,” after a full review of the documents the Court construes that Wiggins likely intended to file a new cause of action. Therefore, the Court ORDERS that the claim raised in plaintiff’s Motion to File Supplemental Petition (Doc. 89) and Docs. 90, 91 and 92, be severed and Page 1 of 2 filed in a new case bearing a new case number. George v. Smith, 507 F.3d 605 (7th Cir. 2007); FED. R. CIV. P. 21. IT IS SO ORDERED. Judge Herndon 2018.02.09 15:21:14 -06'00' United States District Judge Page 2 of 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?