Davis v. County of Will Children and Family Services
| Steven Davis and Steven Lamarr Davis |
| County of Will and Children and Family Services |
| 1:2023cv00907 |
| February 14, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Franklin U Valderrama |
| P.I.: Motor Vehicle |
| 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question |
| Both |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 11, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 36 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Franklin U. Valderrama: Plaintiff has appealed the Court's ruling dismissing this case with prejudice. He has now filed an application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (R. 34) and a motion for leave to appeal in forma pauperis (R. 35), which the Court has reviewed. The Court previously granted Plaintiff's in forma pauperis application (R. 19), and Plaintiff's financial condition has not changed, the court denies the district court form #34 and grants the seventh circuit form #35 . See Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(3) ("A party who was permitted to proceed in forma pauperis in the district-court action... may proceed on appeal in forma pauperis without further authorization, unless... the district court... certifies that the appeal is not taken in good faith or finds that the party is not otherwise entitled to proceed in forma pauperis... or a statute provides otherwise."). Emailed notice (axc). |
| MAILED copy Minute Entry #36 to Plaintiff Steven Lamarr Davis. (axc). |
| Filing 35 MOTION by Plaintiff Steven Lamarr Davis for leave to appeal in forma pauperis (Attachments) (kl, ) |
| Filing 34 APPLICATION by Plaintiff Steven Lamarr Davis for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (kl, ) |
| Filing 33 CIRCUIT Rule 3(b) Fee Notice. (nsf, ) |
| Filing 32 ACKNOWLEDGMENT of receipt of short record on appeal regarding notice of appeal #25 ; USCA Case No. 23-1643 (nsf, ) |
| Filing 30 DIGITAL EXHIBIT submitted by Steven Lamarr Davis For more information, please visit https://www.ilnd.uscourts.gov/ExhibitDrop. If you wish to download a digital exhibit, please send your request to the Certified Copy Desk (CCD) inbox at CCD_ILND@ilnd.uscourts.gov. You will be provided with an invoice and charged according to the Fee Schedule. Once your payment has been processed, you will receive a URL via email to download the exhibit. (jcc, ) |
| Filing 29 STATEMENT by Steven Lamarr Davis (kl, ) |
| Filing 28 EXHIBIT Motion to suppress evidence by Steven Lamarr Davis (kl, ) |
| Filing 27 TRANSMITTED to the 7th Circuit the short record on notice of appeal #25 . Notified counsel (kl, ) |
| Filing 26 NOTICE of Appeal Due letter sent to counsel of record regarding notice of appeal #25 (kl, ) |
| Filing 25 NOTICE of appeal by Steven Lamarr Davis regarding orders #23 (kl, ) |
| Filing 24 ENTERED JUDGMENT on 3/29/2023. Mailed notice (axc). |
| Filing 23 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Franklin U. Valderrama: The Court has twice dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim and granted Plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint. See R. 19 (directing Plaintiff to the U.S. District Court Hibbler Memorial Pro Se Assistance Program); R. 21 ("The Court will give Plaintiff one more chance to amend his complaint to state a viable claim[.]"). Plaintiff filed a second amended complaint on 3/22/2023. After reviewing the complaint, the Court concludes that Plaintiff still fails to state a claim. He brings claims for "false convictions and or imprisonment," R. 22 at 3, but in his statement of his claim he alleges that "Still pending of a f[a]lse imprisonment from the DUI 11-14/2003... and f[a]lse convictions of criminal tr[es]passing to land and possession of cannabis." Id. at 4 ("Educational surrogate parent and being takening [sic] away from my mother [illegible]. Then not going to school and under 625 ILCS 5/3-707 driving without insurance."). The second amended complaint then requests that the Court grant him his "drivers privileges and drivers license" and award him damages. Id. at 6. The complaint is devoid of further factual development, and suffers from the same deficiencies as described in the Court's March 21, 2023 minute entry. Having informed Plaintiff that he would not get a fourth chance to state a claim, the Court dismisses this case with prejudice. Civil case terminated. Mailed notice (axc). |
| MAILED copy of Minute Entry #23 and Judgment in a Civil Case #24 to Plaintiff Steven Lamarr Davis. (axc). |
| Filing 22 AMENDED complaint by Steven Lamarr Davis. (kl, ) |
| Filing 21 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Franklin U. Valderrama: Plaintiff has filed an amended complaint with some added detail about the circumstances surrounding his claims. However, after again screening the complaint, the Court finds that Plaintiff still fails to state a claim. Specifically, Plaintiff demands an award of 15 million dollars for "false convictions and imprisonment listed on exhibit and for being D.C.F.S. no high school or gramma school diploma." R. 20 at 3. Plaintiff provides almost no additional factual detail, clarifying that he brings claims against the "County of Will for false convictions and imprisonment of DUI's criminal trespassing possession of cannabis and multiple other charges from a confidential informant... with no physical evidence of a crime... in 2003 to 2011." Id. (also alleging damages "from being taken away from my mother in 1991 and not have a grammar school diploma or a High School diploma and not being able to take care of myself... for pain and suffering and the lost of my childhood life."). He also states that he requests "to return all vehicles and pound and fees and to return drivers license and all cases moved off backgrounds and (D.C.F.S) to be awarded 15 million dollars for not going to school and being taken away from all of my family and now homeless."). Id. at 6. Plaintiff then attaches (1) copies of certain Illinois statutes, including 705 ILCS 405 (Arrest and Custody) and 410 ILCS 705 (Personal Use of Cannabis), (2) what appear to be various court documents, including a list of state criminal charges, and (3) insurance information. Id. at 719. While Plaintiff's claims of wrongful conviction could sound in the Fourth or Fourteenth Amendment, Plaintiff's bare-bones complaint does not allege sufficient factual allegations to state a plausible claim to relief. Besides alleging that a confidential informant had no physical evidence of a crime, Plaintiff makes no allegations establishing who at Will County or DCFS violated his rights, or specifically how they did so. And, importantly, Plaintiff's complaint contains absolutely no allegations that his state court convictions have been invalidated such that he could state a cognizable claim. Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 489 (1994) ("Even a prisoner who has fully exhausted available state remedies has no cause of action under [Section] 1983 unless and until the conviction or sentence is reversed, expunged, invalidated, or impugned by the grant of a writ of habeas corpus."). Further, Plaintiff appears to challenge action taken by the Illinois Department of Children and Family Services in 1991, but fails to allege what happened or why it was wrongful. The Court will give Plaintiff one more chance to amend his complaint to state a viable claim by detailing the facts surrounding his alleged deprivation of constitutional rights, and establishing that the convictions he alleged were wrongful and have been invalidated such that he could recover damages. Plaintiff shall file an amended complaint by 4/17/2023 or this case may be dismissed. Mailed notice (axc). |
| MAILED copy of Minute Entry #21 and blank amended complaint forms to Plaintiff Steven Lamarr Davis. (axc). |
| Filing 20 AMENDED complaint by Steven Lamarr (Attachments) (kl, ) |
| Filing 19 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Franklin U. Valderrama: Plaintiff has filed a motion to vacate the judgments of what appear to be multiple state court cases against him, and asks the Court "to seal or remove any pass [sic] convictions[.]" R. 17. The motion was filed before Plaintiff paid the filing fee or the Court granted an application to proceed in forma pauperis, so the motion #17 is stricken. In addition, this (federal) Court cannot act as a state court of appeal. See Andress v. Daubert L. Firm LLC, 144 F. Supp. 3d 1034, 1040 (E.D. Wis. 2015), aff'd, 667 F. App'x 154 (7th Cir. 2016) ("Generally, the Rooker-Feldman doctrine 'precludes a United States district court from exercising subject-matter jurisdiction' over 'cases brought by state-court losers complaining of injuries caused by state-court judgments rendered before the district court proceedings commenced and inviting district court review and rejection of those judgments.") (quoting Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Saudi Basic Indus. Corp., 544 U.S. 280, 291 (2005)). Plaintiff has also filed a renewed application to proceed in forma pauperis. R. 18 (Plaintiff was last employed in April 2018 and has received total income of $1,238.00 in the past 12 months). The Court finds that Plaintiff qualifies for waiver of the filing fee and so the motion #18 is granted. However, the Court must also determine that the action is neither frivolous nor malicious, does not fail to state a claim, and does not seek money damages against a defendant immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. 1915. Upon review of Plaintiff's "Complaint for Violation of Constitutional Rights," the Court finds that the complaint does not state a claim. R. 1. In response to Question 6 of the complaint form, Plaintiff does not check a box or otherwise explain how Defendants violated his constitutional rights. Id. at 2. He merely states that he was charged with a crime, and alleges "I don't know but the police keep try put me in jail in Joliet." Id. at 4. The rest of the complaint includes state court documents, news articles, and other documentation without alleging facts. Accordingly, the complaint is dismissed and Plaintiff is granted leave to file an amended complaint. By 4/10/2023, Plaintiff must file an amended complaint that states a claim by alleging the facts surrounding his alleged deprivation of rights. See Carr v. Fuchs, 2023 WL 2351823, at *3 (W.D. Wis. Mar. 3, 2023) (stating that the plaintiff should "[o]mit legal arguments other than explaining what types of claims he wishes to assert."). For legal assistance, the Court again directs Plaintiff's attention to the U.S. District Court Hibbler Memorial Pro Se Assistance Program, information about which can be found at: https://www.ilnd.uscourts.gov/Pages.aspx?/2+UWDbtVzCDq3Lu8BusuQ== or 312-435-5691. Emailed notice (axc). |
| MAILED copy of Minute Entry #19 and blank amended complaint forms to Plaintiff Steven Lamarr Davis. (axc). |
| Filing 16 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Franklin U. Valderrama: Plaintiff has filed a one-page "Amended Motion To Appeal Denia [sic] of Employment and The Exhibit Complaint," in response to the Court's minute entry of 3/2/2023, which Plaintiff attaches to his new "Amended Motion." R. 15 ("The evidence may refer only to character... of Section 5-15 [unintelligible] of the Juvenile Court 'Act' of 1987... The Cooperation of federal law enforcement officers with Illinois officials did not violate the Double Jeopard Claus [sic] of the fifth amendment... "). The motion, however, is not an application to proceed in forma pauperis, and Plaintiff has not paid the filing fee. Therefore, the Court cannot rule on this (or any) motion, and the motion #15 is stricken. The Court's minute entry of 3/2/2023 remains operative: "By 3/17/2023, Plaintiff shall pay the filing fee or submit another in forma pauperis application, or this case may be dismissed. If Plaintiff submits another in forma pauperis application that again omits his last dates of employment and last monthly take-home pay, without stating that he has never been employed, the Court will again deny the application." R. 14. Emailed notice (axc). |
| MAILED copy of Minute Entry #16 to Plaintiff Steven Lamarr Davis. (axc). |
| Filing 18 APPLICATION by Plaintiff Steven Lamarr Davis for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (kl, ) |
| Filing 17 MOTION by Plaintiff Steven Lamarr Davis. (kl, ) |
| Filing 15 AMENDED MOTION by Plaintiff Steven Lamarr Davis. (Attachment) (kl, ) |
| Filing 14 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Franklin U. Valderrama: Plaintiff has filed another application to proceed in forma pauperis #12 and motion for attorney representation #13 . But they are essentially replicas of his previous submissions, and suffer from the exact same deficiencies. R. 3, 4; see R. 8, 11 (explaining that the in forma pauperis application requires Plaintiff to state his last date(s) of employment and last monthly take-home pay, and that Plaintiff must contact at least three law firms or legal aid organizations to demonstrate that he has made a reasonable effort to obtain counsel on his own). For that reason, the application #12 and motion #13 are again denied without prejudice. By 3/17/2023, Plaintiff shall pay the filing fee or submit another in forma pauperis application, or this case may be dismissed. If Plaintiff submits another in forma pauperis application that again omits his last dates of employment and last monthly take-home pay, without stating that he has never been employed, the Court will again deny the application. Emailed notice (axc). |
| MAILED copy of Minute Entry #14 to Plaintiff Steven Lamarr Davis. (axc). |
| Filing 13 MOTION by Plaintiff Steven Lamarr Davis for attorney representation (jg, ) |
| Filing 12 APPLICATION by Plaintiff Steven Lamarr Davis for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (jg, ) |
| Filing 11 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Franklin U. Valderrama: On 2/17/2023, the Court denied Plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis without prejudice with leave to refile because the form was incomplete, and denied Plaintiff's motion for attorney representation without prejudice. R. 8. Specifically, on his in forma pauperis application, Plaintiff did not indicate his last dates of employment, or state that he had never been employed. Id.; see R. 3 1. On 2/22/2023, Plaintiff filed a one-page "Motion to appeal Denia [sic] of Employment," but that is all the motion says, in its entirety. R. 9. Plaintiff also filed, on 2/22/2023, a three-page document that is labeled "EXHIBITS" on the docket. R. 10. The three pages include (1) what appears to be a docket sheet for a case brought against Plaintiff in Will County, Illinois, with a "Nolle Prosequi" disposition, (2) a screenshot of a "Notice of Decision" document regarding SNAP benefits, and (3) a social security benefit statement. Id. Because the document contains confidential information, the Clerk is ordered to seal docket number 10. Because Plaintiff's motion does not make any request of the Court, the motion #9 is denied. The Court, intending to be as clear as possible, reiterates that Plaintiff needs to fill out another in forma pauperis form, like the one he filed on 2/14/2023, but also include information about his last employment or inform the Court that he has never been employed. See R. 3 1 (asking the "Date(s) of last employment:" and "Last monthly take-home pay:"). He must fill out the form, truthfully, in its entirety, but nothing more. If Plaintiff does not submit a renewed application to proceed in forma pauperis by 3/10/2023, or pay the filing fee by that date, this case may be dismissed. For legal assistance, the Court again directs Plaintiff's attention to the U.S. District Court Hibbler Memorial Pro Se Assistance Program, information about which can be found at: https://www.ilnd.uscourts.gov/Pages.aspx?/2+UWDbtVzCDq3Lu8BusuQ== or 312-435-5691. Emailed notice (axc). |
| MAILED copy of Minute Entry #11 to Plaintiff Steven Lamarr Davis. (axc). |
| Filing 10 EXHIBITS by Plaintiff Steven Lamarr Davis. (gcy, ) |
| Filing 9 MOTION by Plaintiff Steven Lamarr Davis to Appeal denia of Employment. (gcy, ) |
| Filing 8 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Franklin U. Valderrama: Plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis #3 is denied at this time with leave to refile because the form is incomplete. Plaintiff avers that he is not employed, but does not include the dates of his last employment (or indicate N/A) or his last monthly take-home pay. R. 3 1. Plaintiff shall refile his application to proceed in forma pauperis, or pay the filing fee, by 3/10/2023 or this case may be dismissed. Plaintiff's motion for attorney representation #4 is also denied without prejudice at this time. Plaintiff avers that he does not "have the money" and so has not been able to find an attorney. R. 4 2. However, the form motion asks Plaintiff to declare which attorneys and organizations he has contacted seeking representation, and he leaves that section blank. Id. 2 ("NOTE: This item must be completed."). Plaintiff must contact at least three law firms or legal aid organizations to demonstrate that he has made a reasonable effort to obtain counsel on his own. See Pickett v. Chi. Transit Auth., 930 F.3d 869, 871 (7th Cir. 2019) ("A litigant's good faith but unsuccessful effort to obtain counsel is a necessary condition to the provision of judicial assistance to recruit a lawyer."). For legal assistance, the Court directs Plaintiff's attention to the U.S. District Court Hibbler Memorial Pro Se Assistance Program, information about which can be found at: https://www.ilnd.uscourts.gov/Pages.aspx?/2+UWDbtVzCDq3Lu8BusuQ== or 312-435-5691. Plaintiff may renew his motion for attorney representation if the case progresses; however, any renewed motion must include information about which law firms or legal aid organizations Plaintiff has contacted, as indicated above. Mailed notice (jlj, ) |
| CLERK'S NOTICE: Pursuant to Local Rule 73.1(b), a United States Magistrate Judge of this court is available to conduct all proceedings in this civil action. If all parties consent to have the currently assigned United States Magistrate Judge conduct all proceedings in this case, including trial, the entry of final judgment, and all post-trial proceedings, all parties must sign their names on the attached #Consent To# form. This consent form is eligible for filing only if executed by all parties. The parties can also express their consent to jurisdiction by a magistrate judge in any joint filing, including the Joint Initial Status Report or proposed Case Management Order. (kl, ) |
| Filing 5 PRO SE Appearance by Plaintiff Steven Davis (kl, ) |
| Filing 4 MOTION by Plaintiff Steven Davis for attorney representation (kl, ) |
| Filing 3 APPLICATION by Plaintiff Steven Davis for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (kl, ) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL Cover Sheet (kl, ) |
| Filing 1 RECEIVED Complaint and no copies by Steven Davis. (Attachments) (kl, ) |
| CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Franklin U. Valderrama. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Jeffrey Cole. Case assignment: Random assignment. (kl, ) |
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.
