Ezebuiroh v. Doe 1 et al
| Jerry B. Ezebuiroh |
| John Doe 2, John Doe 1 and John Doe 3 |
| 3:2020cv00205 |
| February 21, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Illinois |
| J Phil Gilbert |
| Prison Condition |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on July 8, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 9
ORDER DENYING #8 Plaintiff's Motion for Emergency Transfer. The Court construes the motion as a request for a temporary restraining order ("TRO") under Fed. R. Civ. P. 65. See Merritte v. Kessel, 561 F. App'x 546, 548 (7th Cir. 2014) (identifying factors court considers when presented with a TRO motion). Plaintiff filed a similar motion in 3 of his 11 pending cases. See Ezebuiroh v. Doe, No. 20-cv-135-JPG (Doc. 12); Ezebuiroh v. Doe, No. 20-cv-203-JPG (Doc. 7); Ezebuiroh v. Doe, No. 20-cv-205-JPG (Doc. 8). He seeks a transfer from Marion County Jail to Clinton County Jail. Plaintiff complains of inadequate medical care for generalized pain, bumps, and difficulty swallowing; placement in a detox cell without a snack bag and low blood sugar on an unspecified date; excessive weight loss; retaliation by staff who enter his cell and kick his mat; and two holes in the wall that allowed gasoline fumes to enter his cell when "they crank[ed] up the 4w[h]eeler in the garage." (Docs. 7, 8, and 12). The Constitution does not guarantee placement in a particular facility, and the Court is generally reluctant to interfere with placement decisions made by jail and//r prison officials. Meachum v. Fano, 427 U.S. 215, 224 (1976); Montanye v. Haymes, 427 U.S. 236 (1976); DeTomaso v. McGinnis, 970 F.2d 211, 212 (7th Cir. 1992). Moreover, Plaintiff sets forth insufficient grounds to support his transfer request or a finding that he will suffer irreparable harm without a TRO. It is unclear what medical treatment he requires, requested, and/or was denied for his miscellaneous medical issues. Further, his complaint of staff retaliation provides little insight into the nature, scope, and severity of the staff misconduct he now faces. To the extent Plaintiff believes medical care or a jail transfer is still necessary, he should consult with his attorneys in Case Nos. 19-cv-00729-JPG and 19-cv-01042-JPG and decide whether to re-file a motion for interim relief in either/both of those cases addressing claims of retaliation and/or the conditions of his confinement. The Motion is DENIED without prejudice herein. Signed by Judge J. Phil Gilbert on 3/11/2020. (jsy) THIS TEXT ENTRY IS AN ORDER OF THE COURT. NO FURTHER DOCUMENTATION WILL BE MAILED.
|
|
Filing 8
MOTION for Emergency Transfer by Jerry B. Ezebuiroh. (jaj)
|
|
Filing 7
CONSENT/NON-CONSENT TO U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE - sealed pending receipt from all parties. (jaj)
|
|
Filing 6
ORDER GRANTING Plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis ("IFP") (Doc. #2 ). Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1915(b)(1), Plaintiff is assessed an initial partial filing fee of $30.00. The agency having custody of Plaintiff is directed to forward the initial partial filing fee from Plaintiff's account to the Clerk of Court upon receipt of this Order. Plaintiff shall make monthly payments of 20% of the preceding month's income credited to Plaintiff's prison trust fund account (including all deposits to the inmate account from any source) until the $350.00 filing fee is paid in full. The agency having custody of Plaintiff shall forward payments from Plaintiff's account to the Clerk of this Court each time the amount in the account exceeds $10 until the $350.00 filing fee is paid.In addition, Plaintiff shall note that the filing fees for multiple cases cumulate. See Newlin v. Helman, 123 F.3d 429, 436 (7th Cir. 1997), overruled in part on other grounds by Lee v. Clinton, 209 F.3d 1025 (7th Cir. 2000); Walker v. O'Brien, 216 F.3d 626 (7th Cir. 2000). A prisoner who files one suit must remit 20% of his monthly income to the Clerk of the Court until his fees have been paid; a prisoner who files a second suit or an appeal must remit 40%; and so on. Newlin, 123 F.3d at 436. "Five suits or appeals mean that the prisoner's entire monthly income must be turned over to the court until the fees have been paid." Id. Payments shall be mailed to: Clerk of the Court, United States District Court for the Southern District of Illinois, 750 Missouri Avenue, East St. Louis, Illinois 62201. The Clerk is DIRECTED to mail a copy of this Order to the Trust Fund Officer at the Marion County Law Enforcement Center upon entry of this Order. Signed by Judge J. Phil Gilbert on 2/27/2020. (tjk)THIS TEXT ENTRY IS AN ORDER OF THE COURT. NO FURTHER DOCUMENTATION WILL BE MAILED.
|
|
Filing 5
NOTICE FROM CLERK Instructing Plaintiff to file Notice and Consent to Proceed Before A Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction Form: Pursuant to Administrative Order No. 257, within 21 days of this Notice, you must file the attached form indicating your consent to proceed before a Magistrate Judge or an affirmative declination to consent. Consent/Non-Consent to U.S. Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction form sent to Plaintiff on 2/21/2020. Consent due by 3/13/2020 (jaj)
|
|
Filing 4
NOTICE AND ORDER: The Court has received your complaint and your motion to proceed without prepayment of the filing fee. Your case number is 20-205-JPG The following is some information you should know regarding the initial stages of your lawsuit. After your filing fee status is determined, the Court will review your complaint to identify legally sufficient claims and defendants and dismiss any legally insufficient claims. See: 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1915A. The Court will conduct this review within the next 60 days and inform you of the findings in a Merit Review Order. No other action will be taken in your case during this time, absent extraordinary circumstances. Therefore, you do not need to submit any evidence, argument, motions, or other documents. If you filed a motion for recruitment of counsel along with your complaint, it will not be considered until the merit review is complete. Please note that any motion for recruitment of counsel must include evidence of your own efforts to find counsel, such as a list of the attorneys you contacted and copies of letters you sent or received. See Pruitt v. Mote, 503 F.3d 647, 654-55 (7th Cir. 2007). If you do not receive a Merit Review Order within the next 60 days, you may file a motion requesting the status of your case. In the event your claim(s) survive the merit review, further information and instruction will be provided to you at that time. In addition, several administrative matters warrant mention. Any communication directed to the Court should be in the form of a motion or other pleading and not a letter. All mail should be sent to: Clerk's Office, U.S. District Court, 750 Missouri Avenue, East St. Louis, IL 62201. Finally, you are advised that if your address changes, you must notify the Court within seven days of the change by filing a Notice of Change of Address. Failure to do so could result in the dismissal of your case. Signed by Judge J. Phil Gilbert on 2/21/2020. (jaj)THIS TEXT ENTRY IS AN ORDER OF THE COURT. NO FURTHER DOCUMENTATION WILL BE MAILED.
|
|
Filing 3
MOTION for Recruitment of Counsel by Jerry B. Ezebuiroh. (jaj)
|
|
Filing 2
MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Jerry B. Ezebuiroh. (jaj)
|
|
Filing 1
COMPLAINT against All Defendants filed by Jerry B. Ezebuiroh.(jaj)
|
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 Southern 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.
