Smith, Derrick v. Dickman, Robert

Filing 1

ORDER severing case 12-cv-943-wmc. Signed by District Judge William M. Conley on 1/21/2014. (jef)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
DERRICK L. SMITH,
Plaintiff,

ORDER

v.
12-cv-953-wmc
ROBERT DICKMAN,
Defendant.
On November 22, 2013, the court issued an order striking Marathon County Jail
inmate Derrick L. Smith’s proposed civil action against former Jail Administrator Robert
Dickman pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. In that order, the court instructed Smith to submit
an amended version in compliance with federal pleading rules found at Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a).
Smith has now responded by filing three amended complaints. The first amended
complaint faults Dickman for changing jail policy in 2012, eliminating outside appointments
with private mental health care providers for detainees. (Dkt. # 25). In the second amended
complaint, Smith takes issue with his placement in disciplinary segregation, which allegedly
aggravated his anxiety, depression and insomnia.

(Dkt. # 26).

The third amended

complaint concerns restrictions on Smith’s ability to shave in 2012 and 2013, which
reportedly aggravated a skin condition (folliculitis). (Dkt. # 27).
Smith may not pursue all three complaints in this case. See George v. Smith, 507 F.3d
605, 607 (7th Cir. 2007) (emphasizing that the federal rules on joinder apply to pro se
litigants).

Within ten days, Smith must notify the court in writing with which of the

proposed amended complaints he wishes to proceed. Once this notice is received, the other
two proposed amended complaints will be severed from this action and assigned separate case
numbers for screening pursuant to the Prison Litigation Reform Act (the “PLRA”).

ORDER
IT IS ORDERED that:
1. Within ten (10) days of the date of this order, plaintiff Derrick L. Smith
must notify the court in writing which one of his three proposed amended
complaints he wishes to proceed with for purposes of screening under the
PLRA in this case.
2. Once this notice is received, the clerk’s office shall sever the other two
proposed amended complaints from this action and assigned separate case
numbers for PLRA screening.
3. If plaintiff fails to respond as directed, then this case will be closed
without further notice pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).
Entered this 21st day of January, 2014.
BY THE COURT:
/s/
__________________________________
WILLIAM M. CONLEY
District Judge

2