Njos v. Nurse et al
| Scott Njos |
| Mindi Nurse, . Shelton, . Alford, Ginger Davis, . Nikki, S Strowmatt, . Torres, John/Jane Doe and Charity Dyer |
| 1:2025cv01305 |
| July 25, 2025 |
| U.S. District Court for the Central District of Illinois |
| Colin Stirling Bruce |
| Prisoner Petitions - Prison Conditions |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on August 11, 2025. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 9 +++ PRISONER TRUST FUND LEDGER by Scott Njos (KE) |
TEXT ORDER entered by Judge Colin Stirling Bruce on 8/5/2025. Plaintiff's motion to dismiss this case voluntarily #8 is GRANTED. Pursuant to Plaintiff's motion and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41, this case is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. All other pending motions are denied as moot, and all entries on the Court's calendar are vacated. No judgment to enter. (KE)
|
| Filing 8 MOTION to Dismiss by Plaintiff Scott Njos. Responses due by 8/18/2025 (RES) |
|
TEXT ORDER entered by Judge Colin Stirling Bruce on 7/28/2025. Plaintiff's motion for a temporary restraining order or for a preliminary injunction #5 is DENIED. Plaintiff moves the Court for an Order that would allow him to keep his wheelchair in his cell with him at all times. Plaintiff contends that Defendants' refusal to allow him to keep his wheelchair in his cell has caused him to experience illnesses and maladies. Plaintiff asks the Court for a mandatory, preliminary injunction, but mandatory injunctions are very rarely issued except on the clearest equitable grounds. W.A. Mack v. General Motors Corp., 260 F.2d 886, 890 (7th Cir. 1958). "To obtain a preliminary injunction, the moving party must show that its case has 'some likelihood of success on the merits' and that it has 'no adequate remedy at law and will suffer irreparable harm if a preliminary injunction is denied.'" Stuller, Inc. v. Steak N Shake Enter., Inc., 695 F.3d 676, 678 (7th Cir. 2012) (quoting Ezell v. City of Chicago, 651 F.3d 684, 694 (7th Cir. 2011). If the moving party meets these threshold requirements, the district court "must consider the irreparable harm that the nonmoving party will suffer if preliminary relief is granted, balancing such harm against the irreparable harm the moving party will suffer if relief is denied." Ty, Inc. v. Jones Group, Inc., 237 F.3d 891, 895 (7th Cir. 2001). The district court must also consider the public's interest in an injunction. Id. In this balancing of harms, the district court must weigh these factors against one another "in a sliding scale analysis." Christian Legal Soc'y v. Walker, 453 F.3d 853, 859 (7th Cir. 2006). "The sliding scale approach is not mathematical in nature, rather 'it is more properly characterized as subjective and intuitive, one which permits district courts to weigh the competing considerations and mold appropriate relief.'" Ty, Inc., 237 F.3d at 895-96 (quoting Abbot Labs. v. Mead Johnson and Co., 971 F.2d 6, 12 (7th Cir. 1992)). A preliminary injunction is "an extraordinary and drastic remedy, one that should not be granted unless the movant, by a clear showing, carries the burden of persuasion." Mazurek v. Armstrong, 520 U.S. 968, 972 (1997). The movant must carry his burden of persuasion on each of the elements necessary to enter injunctive relief in order to obtain injunctive relief. Rust Envt. and Infrastructure, Inc. v. Teunissen, 131 F.3d 1210, 1219 (7th Cir. 1997) (holding that a party seeking a preliminary injunction must satisfy each element). Plaintiff's motion is denied for two reasons. First, Plaintiff, essentially, asks the Court to become involved in the day-to-day operations of the prison regarding allowing a certain object within the cell. Such involvement in the day-to-day operations of a prison is something that courts should be hesitant to do. Johnson v. California, 543 U.S. 499, 529 (2005)("Well before Turner, this Court recognized that experienced prison administrators, and not judges, are in the best position to supervise the daily operations of prisons across this country."); Lewis v. Casey, 518 U.S. 343, 361(1996) (same). Therefore, the Court cannot say that the public's interest is in granting the requested injunction at this time. Second, the Court cannot say, based upon this sparse record, that Plaintiff has some likelihood of succeeding on the merits of his claims. Accordingly, Plaintiff's motion is denied. (KE)
|
|
TEXT ORDER entered by Judge Colin Stirling Bruce on 7/28/2025. Plaintiff's motion to request counsel #4 is DENIED. The Court generally will not consider recruiting counsel for a pro se plaintiff until the Court determines that he possess a claim upon which relief can be granted after the Court conducts a review of the complaint. Plaintiff may renew his motion if his claim survives that review that the Court will conduct in the near future. (KE)
|
| Filing 7 Letter Requesting Trust Fund Ledger. Trust fund ledger sheets due by 8/8/2025. (KE) |
| Filing 6 MEMORANDUM in Support re #5 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order filed by Plaintiff Scott Njos. (KE) |
| Filing 5 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction, MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order by Plaintiff Scott Njos. Responses due by 8/8/2025 (Attachments: #1 Declaration)(KE) |
| Filing 4 MOTION to Request Counsel by Plaintiff Scott Njos. Responses due by 8/8/2025 (KE) |
| Filing 3 PETITION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS, filed by Scott Njos.(KE) |
| Filing 2 NOTICE OF CASE OPENING. Please be advised that your case has been assigned to Judge Colin Stirling Bruce. Effective immediately, all documents should be mailed or scanned to the Urbana Division, 201 S Vine Street, Urbana, IL 61802.Merit Review Deadline set for 8/14/2025. (Attachments: #1 Notice Regarding Privacy Issues)(KE) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants, filed by Scott Njos.(KE) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. 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.
