Jackson, Sr. v. Illinois Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS) et al
| Lawrence Jackson, Sr. |
| Illinois Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS), Marc Smith and Michelle Holmes |
| 1:2026cv08045 |
| July 9, 2026 |
| U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Franklin U Valderrama |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 1, 2026. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 14 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Franklin U. Valderrama: Plaintiff has filed interrogatories and requests for production of documents on the docket #12 , #13 . On 7/20/2026, the Court granted Plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis and authorized the U.S. Marshals Service to serve Defendants #9 . Nothing on the docket reflects that service has yet been effectuated. Discovery cannot commence until Defendants have been served and appeared in the case. Even then, the parties must engage in a conference pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f) before a party may seek discovery, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(d). Finally, the Court advises Plaintiff that, even once discovery commences, discovery requests should not be filed on the docket. Accordingly, the Court strikes Plaintiff's interrogatories and requests for production #12 , #13 . Mailed notice. (jcm) |
| Filing 13 FIRST REQUEST for production of documents and electronically stored information to Defendants (Received at the Intake Counter on 08/31/26.) by Lawrence Jackson, Sr.(lj, ) |
| Filing 12 PLAINTIFF'S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO DEFENDANTS by Lawrence Jackson, Sr. (Received at the Intake Counter on 08/31/26.) (lj, ) |
| Filing 11 SUMMONS Issued (Court Participant) as to Defendants Michelle Holmes, Illinois Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS), Marc Smith sent via email to the U.S. Marshal's Office via email along with the received USM 285 form(s) 6 , a certified copy of order #9 , and a copy of the complaint #10 (Attachments: #1 Summons, #2 Summons) (vjd, ) |
| Filing 10 COMPLAINT filed by Lawrence Jackson, Sr.; Jury Demand. (vjd, ) |
| Filing 9 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Franklin U. Valderrama: Plaintiff's renewed application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis #8 is granted. The Court finds that Plaintiff is unable to pay the costs and fees associated with filing this action and thus the filing fee is waived. The Court has reviewed Plaintiff's complaint #1 , and finds that Plaintiff has sufficiently stated a claim such that it survives screening under 28 U.S.C. 1915(a). Accordingly, because Plaintiff has been authorized to proceed in forma pauperis, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(c)(3), the Court appoints the United States Marshal's office to serve Defendants. The Clerk of the Court is directed to: (1) file Plaintiff's complaint; (2) issue summonses for Defendants; and (3) forward the summonses and Plaintiff's USM-285 forms to the Marshal. The Marshal is authorized to mail a request for waiver of service to Defendants in the manner prescribed by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(d)(2) before attempting personal service. Mailed notice. (jcm) |
| Filing 8 APPLICATION by Plaintiff Lawrence Jackson, Sr. for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (Exhibits) (Received at the Intake Counter on 07/16/2026) (man, ) |
| Filing 7 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Franklin U. Valderrama: Plaintiff's application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) #4 is denied without prejudice with leave to refile because it is incomplete and because it is implausible, in that Plaintiff avers that he has received zero income in the past twelve months and has zero assets. That information also contradicts his later statement that he "get[s] public assistance." As the Seventh Circuit has explained, "[a] federal litigant who is unable to pay court fees may proceed in forma pauperis, which means that he or she 'may commence a civil action without prepaying fees or paying certain expenses.' To qualify for IFP status, a plaintiff must fully disclose her financial condition, and she must do so truthfully under penalty of perjury." Effinger v. Monterrey Sec. Consultants, 546 F. Supp. 3d 715, 717 (N.D. Ill. 2021) (internal citations omitted) ("[p]roceeding in forma pauperis is a privilege, and courts depend on the plaintiff's honesty in assessing her ability to pay."). Here, it is not clear how Plaintiff paid for basic living necessities if Plaintiff truly had no sources of money. Plaintiff must provide accurate financial information for a full year, and if the responses on sources of money remains zero, then the Plaintiff must explain in writing on the application how Plaintiff obtained living necessities. "[C]ourts routinely infer an intent to deceive when the plaintiff offers excuses that are implausible or do not hold up on the record." Effinger, 546 F. Supp. 3d at 717-18; see Robie v. Thompson, No. 22-cv-06354, Dkt. 5 (N.D. Ill. Dec. 14, 2022) (declining to "accept the implausible claim that [Plaintiff] obtained the basic necessities of life during the portion of the past year when he was not in custody with no visible means of support. [Plaintiff] is placed on notice that the court gives pro se litigants wide latitude but will not overlook incorrect sworn information provided on forms designed to elicit basic financial information from unrepresented individuals."). Additionally, Plaintiff did not list the date of last employment or Plaintiff's last monthly take-home pay in response to Question 1. Nor did Plaintiff indicate whether he or not he is married, and if so, his spouse's employment information, in response to Question 2. Plaintiff must submit a complete and accurate application, or pay the $405 filing fee, by 7/27/2026. If Plaintiff does not submit a complete and accurate application or pay the filing fee by the deadline, his claims will be dismissed without prejudice for failure to pay the filing fee. Mailed notice. (jcm) |
| 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. (aee, ) |
| Filing 4 APPLICATION by Plaintiff Lawrence Jackson, Sr. for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. (Received at the Intake Counter on 07/09/26) (aee, ) |
| Filing 3 PRO SE Appearance by Plaintiff Lawrence Jackson, Sr. (Received at the Intake Counter on 07/09/26) (aee, ) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL Cover Sheet. (Received at the Intake Counter on 07/09/26) (aee, ) |
| Filing 1 RECEIVED Complaint for violation of Civil Rights 42 U.S.C. 1983 - Fourteenth Amendment and no copies by Lawrence Jackson, Sr. (Received at the Intake Counter on 07/09/26) (aee, ) Modified on 7/10/2026 (aee, ). |
| CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Franklin U. Valderrama. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Daniel P. McLaughlin. Case assignment: Random assignment. (Civil Category 2). (aee, ) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. 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.
