Shanklin v. Liberty Health Care Corp et al
| Reginald Bernard Shanklin |
| Liberty Health Care Corp, Department of Human Services, Anderson Freeman, Shaun Jumper, Gregg Scott, Joseph Hankins, Krista Wilcoxen, David Biermann, Sandra Simpson, Judith Roth, Paula Lodge, Amber Jelinek, Amy Goldstein, Sarah Dodds, Mark Nguyen, Gearld Carreon, Laura Polhamus, Jackie White, Jennifer Block and Curtis Parsons |
| 4:2016cv04010 |
| January 7, 2016 |
| US District Court for the Central District of Illinois |
| Rock Island Office |
| Schuyler |
| Sara Darrow |
| Conditions of Confinement |
| 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
10
MERIT REVIEW OPINION - Entered by Judge Harold A. Baker on 3/18/2016. (Rule 16 Deadline 5/17/2016.) Hougas is added as a defendant. The court finds that the plaintiff states a First Amendment retaliation claim and an equal protection claim under the Fourteenth Amendment against defendants Hougas, Jumper, Dodds, Lodge, Jelinek, Goldstein, Nguyen, Carreon, Polhamus, White, and Block. Any additional claims shall not be included in the case, except at the courts discretion on motion by a party for good cause shown or pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15. The clerk is directed to enter the standard qualified protective order pursuant to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act. The clerk is directed to terminate Liberty Health Care Corp., Department of Human Services, Dr. Anderson Freeman, Gregg Scott, Joseph Hankins, Krista Wilcoxen, David Biermann, Sandra Simpson, Judith Roth and Curtis Parsons as defendants. The clerk is directed to terminate the defenda nts not listed in paragraph 2 above. The clerk is directed to attempt service on the defendants pursuant to the standard procedures. Plaintiff's 3 motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is granted. Plaintiff's 6 motion for conf irmation and 7 motion for status are denied as moot. Plaintiff's motions for counsel are denied 5 , 9 , with leave to renew upon demonstrating that he made attempts to hire his own counsel. Pruitt v.Mote, 503 F.3d 647, 654-55 (7th Cir. 2007 ). This typically requires writing to several lawyers and attaching the responses. If Plaintiff renews his motion, he should set forth how far he has gone in school, any jobs he has held inside and outside of prison, any classes he has taken in prison, and any prior litigation experience he has.(LN, 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.
