Dyjak v. Unknown Party

Filing 12

IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff is GRANTED leave to file a First Amended Complaint in this case on or before August 3, 2018. Should Plaintiff fail to file his First Amended Complaint within the allotted time, this action will be dismissed for failure to comply with a court order and/or prosecute his claims. (Amended Pleadings due by 8/3/2018). Signed by Judge David R. Herndon on 7/3/2018. (tjk)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
LOGAN DYJAK,
Plaintiff,
vs.
JOE HARPER,
Defendant.

Case No. 18-cv-01011-DRH
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

HERNDON, District Judge:
This case was opened on April 19, 2018, after Plaintiff Logan Dyjak filed a
letter with the Court indicating that he has been denied access to the courts
during his detention at Chester Mental Health Center (“CMHC”).

(Doc. 1).

Plaintiff did not indicate whether he intended the letter to serve as his Complaint,
and it did not satisfy Rules 8 or 10 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Therefore, on April 24, 2018, the Court entered an Order requiring Plaintiff to
either file a properly completed Complaint or request dismissal of the action in
the event this case was improperly opened. (Doc. 3). The deadline for doing so
was May 22, 2018. Id.
Plaintiff responded by filing a series of documents, in which he explained
that he was unable to file his Complaint because he lacked sufficient postage and
photocopying services. (Docs. 4, 7, 10-11). Plaintiff indicated that he is given
only two stamps a week at CMHC, and this postage is insufficient to mail his 250page Complaint to the Court. Id. He used the stamps he was given to file other
1

pleadings necessary to move this case forward, including his Motion for Leave to
Proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 5) and a Motion for Recruitment of Counsel
(Doc. 10). He also filed a 10-page Supplement to the original Complaint1 on May
16, 2018, a 7-page Declaration on June 14, 2018, and another 7-page Declaration
on June 28, 2018.

In his most recent Declaration, Plaintiff indicated that he

would begin mailing his 250-page Complaint to the Court in 36 separate batches
of 7 pages each. (Doc. 11, p. 3). To date, the Court has not received any portion
of the Complaint. However, the Court strongly discourages Plaintiff from mailing
his voluminous Complaint to the Court over the course of 9 months, as proposed.
The Court will instead provide Plaintiff with another blank civil rights
complaint form for use in preparing and filing his Complaint. Plaintiff should use
the form to set forth each of his claims against the defendants in basic terms. It is
not necessary to include detailed allegations or voluminous exhibits at this point
in litigation. Plaintiff should simply state what each defendant did (or failed to
do) to violate his federal constitutional rights. The statements in the complaint
which Plaintiff makes must be simple and plain. The Court will then review the
Complaint and determine whether it survives preliminary review. In addition, the
Court will consider whether recruitment of counsel is necessary going forward.
In the meantime, the Court has considered whether Plaintiff’s Motion for
Recruitment of Counsel (Doc. 10) should be granted and determined that it is not
warranted at this time. A district court faced with a request for counsel must ask

1

Although this document was filed as an Amended Complaint, Plaintiff indicated that it
was a supplement to the original Complaint that he still has not filed. (Doc. 4, p. 6).

2

two questions: “(1) [H]as the indigent plaintiff made a reasonable attempt to
obtain counsel or been effectively precluded from doing so; and if so, (2) given the
difficulty of the case, does the plaintiff appear competent to litigate it himself?”
Pruitt v. Mote, 503 F.3d 647, 654 (7th Cir. 2007) (en banc). Although Plaintiff
indicates that he has made efforts to locate counsel on his own before seeking the
Court’s assistance, the Court cannot analyze the difficulty of this case, either
factually or legally, because Plaintiff has not provided the Court with a Complaint
or other information necessary to do so. Further, Plaintiff has demonstrated his
ability to consistently prepare and file well-organized and coherent pleadings. He
has also met court-imposed deadlines.

In fact, the only major impediment to

proceeding pro se at this time is Plaintiff’s access to stamps. However, Plaintiff’s
weekly stamp ration is sufficient to file a Complaint using the blank form that the
Court is providing to him. For these reasons, no counsel will be recruited on
Plaintiff’s behalf at this time. However, the Court will revisit this decision, upon
receipt of a Complaint from Plaintiff.
Disposition
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Recruitment of
Counsel (Doc. 10) is DENIED without prejudice to Plaintiff renewing this motion
at any time he deems it appropriate to do so during the pending litigation.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff is GRANTED leave to file a “First
Amended Complaint” in this case on or before August 3, 2018. Should Plaintiff
fail to file his First Amended Complaint within the allotted time, this action will be

3

dismissed for failure to comply with a court order and/or prosecute his claims.
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).
Should Plaintiff decide to file an amended complaint, it is strongly
recommended that he use the civil rights complaint form provided to him. He
should be careful to label the pleading, “First Amended Complaint,” and he must
list this case number (Case No. 18-01011-DRH) on the first page.

To enable

Plaintiff to comply with this Order, the Clerk is DIRECTED to mail Plaintiff a
blank civil rights complaint form.
In the amended complaint, Plaintiff must, at a minimum, describe the
actions taken by each defendant that resulted in the deprivation of his federal
constitutional rights.

He 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 or including
any other unrelated claims in his amended complaint.

Claims found to be

unrelated will be severed into new cases, new case numbers will be assigned,
and additional filing fees will be assessed.
An amended complaint supersedes and replaces all prior versions of the
complaint, rendering them 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. Finally, the First

4

Amended Complaint is subject to review pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A or
28 U.S.C. § 1915(e).
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.

Judge Herndon
2018.07.03
13:14:43 -05'00'
United States District Judge

5