<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="/xsl/rss2.xsl"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
    <channel>
        <title>Shanklin v. Liberty Health Care Corp et al :: Justia Dockets &amp; Filings</title>
        <link>https://dockets.justia.com/docket/illinois/ilcdce/4:2016cv04010/65366</link>
        <atom:link href="https://dockets.justia.com/docket/illinois/ilcdce/4:2016cv04010/65366/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
        <pubDate>Thu, 12 Nov 2026 14:47:32 -0800</pubDate>
        <lastBuildDate>Thu, 12 Nov 2026 14:47:32 -0800</lastBuildDate>
        <generator>Justia Dockets &amp; Filings</generator>
        <copyright>Copyright 2026 Justia Inc</copyright>
        <description>Shanklin v. Liberty Health Care Corp et al - Case Documents</description>
             
                        <item>
        <title>
                            <![CDATA[Document 10]]>
                    </title>
                    <link>
                https://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/illinois/ilcdce/4:2016cv04010/65366/10
            </link>
                <description>
            <![CDATA[
                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&#039;s 3 motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is granted. Plaintiff&#039;s 6 motion for conf irmation and 7 motion for status are denied as moot. Plaintiff&#039;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)
            ]]>
        </description>
                    <guid>
                https://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/illinois/ilcdce/4:2016cv04010/65366/10
            </guid>
                <pubDate>
            Fri, 18 Mar 2016 00:00:00 -0700
        </pubDate>
    </item>
                </channel>
</rss>
