Sanders v. Splittorf et al

Filing 41

ORDER LIFTING STAY and ORDER FOR SERVICE OF PROCESS on Defendants SPLITTORF, McNEAL, and CITY OF ALTON. See attached ORder for details. Signed by Judge J. Phil Gilbert on 5/25/2022. (jsy)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
ARYION SANDERS,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Plaintiff,
vs.
JOE SPLITTORFF,
CITY OF ALTON,
and MICHAEL McNEAL,
Defendants.

Case No. 17-cv-00864-JPG

ORDER LIFTING STAY
GILBERT, District Judge:
This matter is before the Court for review of the status of this stayed case. Plaintiff filed
the underlying action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on August 14, 2017. (Doc. 1). In the Amended
Complaint, Plaintiff asserted four claims against Alton City Police Officers Joe Splittorf and
Michael McNeal and the City of Alton for violating his rights under federal and state law by doing
the following during his criminal interrogation: (1) repeatedly denying his requests to speak with
an attorney; (2) continuing to question him after he asked to stop the interrogation; (3) threatening
him and/or his family and friends with bodily harm; and (4) physically intimidating him. (Doc. 8).
The Amended Complaint survived screening under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. (Doc. 9).
At the time of screening, Plaintiff’s underlying criminal case remained ongoing, so Plaintiff
was ordered to show cause why this case should not be stayed until state criminal proceedings
concluded. (Doc. 9). When he did not respond to the show cause order, the Court stayed this
matter pursuant to Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 (1971), because Plaintiff’s related criminal case
in Madison County Case No. 2015-CF-1880 (“criminal case”), remained pending. (Id.).

1

Plaintiff was required to provide the Court with regular status reports on the underlying
criminal case until the case was resolved. On April 28, 2022, Plaintiff’s counsel filed a status
report indicating that the underlying criminal case against Plaintiff was disposed of “by plea” on
April 27, 2022. (Doc. 40). The Court has reviewed public records and confirmed that the criminal
case is now closed. See People v. Sanders, Madison County Case No. 15-CF-1880 (closed April
27, 2022). The State’s prosecution having come to an end, this civil matter may now proceed.
Accordingly, the stay of this case shall be lifted. Counts 1, 2, and 4 shall proceed against
Defendants Splittorf and McNeal and Count 3 shall proceed against City of Alton once these
defendants are served with this lawsuit.
Disposition
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the STAY of this case is LIFTED, and this lawsuit shall
now be served on Defendants JOE SPLITTORF, MICHAEL McNEAL, and CITY OF
ALTON.
The Clerk of Court shall now prepare for JOE SPLITTORF, MICHAEL McNEAL, and
CITY OF ALTON: (1) Form 5 (Notice of a Lawsuit and Request to Waive Service of a
Summons), and (2) Form 6 (Waiver of Service of Summons). The Clerk is DIRECTED to mail
these forms, a copy of the Amended Complaint (Doc. 8), the Screening Order (Doc. 9), and this
Memorandum and Order to this defendant’s place of employment as identified by Plaintiff. If
Defendant fails to sign and return the Waiver of Service of Summons (Form 6) to the Clerk within
30 days from the date the forms were sent, the Clerk shall take appropriate steps to effect formal
service on this Defendant, and the Court will require the Defendant to pay the full costs of formal
service, to the extent authorized by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

2

If this Defendant can no longer be found at the work address provided by Plaintiff, the
employer shall furnish the Clerk with that Defendant’s current work address, or, if not known, that
Defendant’s last-known address. This information shall be used only for sending the forms as
directed above or for formally effecting service. Any documentation of the address shall be
retained only by the Clerk. Address information shall not be maintained in the court file or
disclosed by the Clerk.
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, even though his
application to proceed in forma pauperis was granted. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(f)(2)(A).
Plaintiff is ADVISED that at the time application was made for leave to proceed 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, 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: 5/25/2022

s/J. Phil Gilbert
J. PHIL GILBERT
United States District Judge

3