Vasquez, Luis et al v. Braemer, Daniel et al

Filing 26

ORDER that each plaintiff may have until April 3, 2012 to notify the court whether he wishes to prosecute this action jointly or whether he wishes to initiate his own lawsuit. Signed by District Judge Barbara B. Crabb on 3/23/2012. (jef),(ps)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - LUIS VASQUEZ, DAVID GREENWOOD,
JAVIER SALAZAR, JULIAN LOPEZ
and ANTHONY RIACH,
ORDER
Plaintiffs,
11-cv-806-bbc
v.
DANIEL BRAEMER, DON STRAHOTA,
WILLIAM POLLARD, PAMELA ZANK,
JEFFREY GARBELMAN, MICHAEL THURMER
and GARY ANKARLO,
Defendants.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This is a group action brought by plaintiffs Luis Vasquez, David Greenwood, Javier
Salazar, Julian Lopez and Anthony Riach, inmates at the Waupun Correctional Institution.
They contend that several employees at the prison violated their constitutional rights. Each
plaintiff is proceeding in forma pauperis and has made an initial partial payment. In
addition, each plaintiff has notified the court that he understands the consequences of
proceeding with this case jointly and that he wishes to do so.
The next step in the case is to screen the complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A to
determine whether any portion is legally frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim upon

1

which relief may be granted or asks for money damages from a defendant who by law cannot
be sued for money damages. However, it is not clear which complaint should be treated as
the operative pleading in this case. Since filing the initial complaint and notifying the court
that they wish to proceed jointly, plaintiffs have filed two motions to amend the complaint.
First, on January 30, 2011, plaintiff Vasquez filed a motion to amend the complaint in
which he crossed out the names of the other plaintiffs, as well as the allegations in the
complaint that did not pertain specifically to him. Dkt. ##21, 22. Vasquez’s proposed
amended complaint suggests that he now wishes to proceed with his claims independently.
However, on February 6, 2012, plaintiffs filed a motion to amend the complaint, submitting
a complaint with all of the plaintiffs’ signatures and claims. Dkt. ##24, 25.
At this stage, it is not clear which complaint should be screened and whether plaintiffs
still wish to proceed with this action jointly. Thus, plaintiffs must notify the court whether
they still intend to prosecute their claims jointly or whether they wish to initiate their own
lawsuits. Specifically, plaintiff Vasquez should explain why he filed an amended complaint
with the other plaintiffs’ names crossed out. Additionally, plaintiffs Greenwood, Salazar,
Lopez and Riach should explain how they wish to proceed with their claims in the event that
Vasquez is no longer a plaintiff in this case. Plaintiffs should also specify which complaint
should be screened as the operative pleading in the case.

2

ORDER
IT IS ORDERED that each plaintiff may have until April 3, 2012 to notify the court
whether he wishes to prosecute this action jointly or whether he wishes to initiate his own
lawsuit.
Entered this 23rd day of March, 2012.
BY THE COURT:
/s/
BARBARA B. CRABB
District Judge

3