Muhammad v. Chicago Volunteer Legal Service (CVLS) et al
| Mahdee H. Muhammad |
| David Gotzh, Chicago Volunteer Legal Service (CVLS) and Rebekah A. Rashidfarokhi |
| 1:2019cv01316 |
| February 22, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| John J Tharp |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Both |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 26, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 12 JUDGMENT ORDER. Signed by the Honorable John J. Tharp, Jr on 3/26/2019. Mailed notice. (sxb, ) |
Filing 11
ORDER: The amended complaint #10 is dismissed with prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. This is a final appealable order; absent ground for extension, see Fed. R. App. P. 4(a), any notice of appeal must be filed in this Court within 30 days of the entry of the judgment on the docket. Enter Judgment Order. Civil case terminated. Signed by the Honorable John J. Tharp, Jr on 3/26/2019. Mailed notice. (sxb, )
|
| Filing 10 AMENDED complaint by Mahdee H. Muhammad against Chicago Volunteer Legal Service (CVLS), David Gotzh, Rebekah A. Rashidfarokhi and 3 copies. (pk, ) |
|
Filing 9
ORDER: Plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis #4 is granted, but his complaint #1 is dismissed without prejudice on initial review pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915. In a prior case assigned to another judge of this Court, the plaintiff attempted to sue a state court judge who presided over a state court child custody case. Case No. 18-CV-5164 (N.D. Ill.) (Durkin, J.) That case was dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. In this casethough the allegations of the complaint are again difficult to followthe plaintiff purports to sue two lawyers (and the legal assistance organization with which they were affiliated), who (it appears) represented another party in that litigation. Plaintiff has no federal claim against his adversaries in state court civil litigation, however. Although the Plaintiff purports to bring this complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983, he has not alleged any deprivation of his constitutional rights committed by a defendant acting under color of state law. See, e.g., Speigel v. McClintic, --- F.3d ---, 2019 WL 625150, *3 (7th Cir. Feb. 14, 2019) ("To state a claim for relief in an action brought under 1983, [a plaintiff] must establish that the alleged deprivation was committed under color of state law. The under-color-of-state-law element means that 1983 does not permit suits based on private conduct, no matter how discriminatory or wrongful.") (internal citations and punctuation omitted). Further, the Court cannot determine whether the Plaintiff has stated a claim pursuant to another cause of action because "the lack of organization and basic coherence renders [the] complaint too confusing to determine the facts that constitute the alleged wrongful conduct." Stanard v. Nygren, 658 F.3d 792, 798 (7th Cir. 2011). The Plaintiff is granted leave to file an amended complaint by 3/22/19. Absent timely filing of an amended complaint, the dismissal shall be with prejudice. Signed by the Honorable John J. Tharp, Jr on 2/25/2019. Mailed notice. (sxb, )
|
| Filing 8 NOTICE TO THE PARTIES - The Court is participating in the Mandatory Initial Discovery Pilot (MIDP). The key features and deadlines are set forth in this Notice which includes a link to the (MIDP) Standing Order and a Checklist for use by the parties. In cases subject to the pilot, all parties must respond to the mandatory initial discovery requests set forth in the Standing Order before initiating any further discovery in this case. Please note: The discovery obligations in the Standing Order supersede the disclosures required by Rule 26(a)(1). Any party seeking affirmative relief must serve a copy of the following documents (Notice of Mandatory Initial Discovery and the Standing Order) on each new party when the Complaint, Counterclaim, Crossclaim, or Third-Party Complaint is served. (sxb, ) |
| Filing 5 MOTION by Plaintiff Mahdee H. Muhammad for attorney representation (sxb, ) |
| Filing 4 APPLICATION by Plaintiff Mahdee H. Muhammad for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (sxb, ) |
| Filing 3 PRO SE Appearance by Plaintiff Mahdee H. Muhammad (sxb, ) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL Cover Sheet (sxb, ) |
| Filing 1 RECEIVED Complaint and 3 copies by Mahdee H. Muhammad (sxb, ) |
Access additional case information on PACER
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 Northern 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.
