Kitterman v. Illinois State Police Department et al
| Shane A Kitterman |
| Illinois State Police Department, Tracie Newton, Leo P Schmitz and State of Illinois |
| 3:2018cv03092 |
| April 24, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Central District of Illinois |
| Springfield Office |
| XX US, Outside State |
| Sue E. Myerscough |
| Tom Schanzle-Haskins |
| Other 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
26
MERIT REVIEW OPINION: Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint is dismissed without prejudice for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The claims against the State of Illinois and the Illinois State Police are barred by the Eleventh Amendment. Plaintiffs remaining § 1983 damages claims against Defendants Newton and Schmitz are barred by Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994). All pending motions are DENIED AS MOOT. THIS CASE IS CLOSED. If P laintiff wishes to appeal this dismissal, he must file a notice of appeal with this Court within 30 days of the entry of judgment. Fed. R. App. P. 4(a). A motion for leave to appeal in forma pauperis should set forth the issues Plaintiff plans to present on appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(1)(C). If Plaintiff does choose to appeal, he will be liable for the $505 appellate filing fee irrespective of the outcome of the appeal. Entered by Judge Sue E. Myerscough on 5/7/2018. (ME, 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.
