Lisle v. Prentice et al
| Steven D Lisle, Jr |
| Susan Prentice, . Pearce, . Smith, . Punke and Tod Nelson |
| 1:2017cv01327 |
| July 13, 2017 |
| US District Court for the Central District of Illinois |
| Peoria Office |
| Livingston |
| Joe Billy McDade |
| Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
27
MERIT REVIEW -- AMENDED COMPLAINT entered by Judge Joe Billy McDade on 7/23/2018. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT THE CLERK IS DIRECTED TO: 1) ATTEMPT SERVICE ON DEFENDANTS PURSUANT TO THE STANDARD PROCEDURES; AND, 2) SET AN INTERNAL COURT DEADLINE 60 DAY S FROM THE ENTRY OF THIS ORDER FOR THE COURT TO CHECK ON THE STATUS OF SERVICE AND ENTERSCHEDULING DEADLINES. LASTLY, IT IS ORDERED THAT IF A DEFENDANT FAILS TO SIGN ANDRETURN A WAIVER OF SERVICE TO THE CLERK WITHIN 30 DAYS AFTER THE WAIVER IS SENT, THE COURT WILL TAKE APPROPRIATE STEPS TO EFFECT FORMAL SERVICE THROUGH THE U.S. MARSHAL'S SERVICE ON THAT DEFENDANT AND WILL REQUIRE THAT DEFENDANT TO PAY THE FULL COSTS OF FORMAL SERVICE PURSUANT TO FEDERAL RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 4(d)(2). SEE FULL WRITTEN ORDER.(SAG, ilcd)
|
|
Filing
12
MERIT REVIEW ORDER entered by Judge Joe Billy McDade on 1/31/2018. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED: 1. This case shall proceed solely on the failure to protect claims against Defendants Prentice, Punke, Smith and Nelson identified herein. Plaintiff's de liberate indifference claim is dismissed for failure to state a claim pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) and 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Plaintiff will have 30 days to file an amended complaint as to the deliberate indifference claim, should he wish. I f he does so, he is to file it as an amended complaint which must contain all allegations against all Defendants. Piecemeal amendments are not accepted. Any claims not identified will not be included in the case, except in the Court's discretion upon motion by a party for good cause shown, or by leave of court pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15. Defendant Pearce is DISMISSED. 2. Plaintiff files 5 requesting the recruitment of pro bono counsel. While Plaintiff claims he has con tacted several attorneys, he does not provide copies of the letters sent to, and received from, prospective counsel. Pruitt v. Mote, 503 F.3d 647, 654-55 (7th Cir. 2007). 5 is DENIED. 3. The Clerk is directed to send to each Defendant pursuant to this District's internal procedures: 1) a Notice of Lawsuit and Request for Waiver of Service; 2) a Waiver of Service; 3)a copy of the Complaint; and 4) a copy of this Order. SEE FULL WRITTEN ORDER.(SAG, ilcd)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Illinois Central District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
