Adkins v. Watson et al
Plaintiff: Carjuan D. Adkins
Defendant: John Doe, Richard Watson, Dr. David, David Marcowitz and Trinity Service Group
Case Number: 3:2020cv00986
Filed: September 25, 2020
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Illinois
Presiding Judge: J Phil Gilbert
Nature of Suit: Prisoner: Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on May 16, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
November 13, 2020 Filing 13 REQUEST FOR WAIVER of Service sent to WATSON, MARCOWITZ, and TRINITY SERVICE GROUP on 11/13/2020. Waiver of Service due by 12/14/2020. (tjk)
November 13, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 12 ORDER FOR SERVICE on Defendants WATSON, MARCOWITZ, and TRINITY SERVICE GROUP and ASSIGNING Attorney Steven S. Wasserman of Williams Venkin et al., St. Louis, Missouri, to represent Plaintiff. The following claims in the #1 Complaint survive screening: COUNT 1 against WATSON and TRINITY SERVICE GROUP; COUNT 2 against WATSON; COUNT 3 against WATSON and MARCOWITZ; and COUNT 4 against MARCOWITZ. COUNTS 5, 6, AND 7 are DISMISSED without prejudice. The Clerk's Office is DIRECTED to TERMINATE Defendants JOHN DOES and DR. DAVID as parties in CM/ECF and ENTER the standard qualified protective order pursuant to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act. Attorney Wasserman shall enter his appearance on or before November 30, 2020. Signed by Judge J. Phil Gilbert on 11/12/2020. (jsy)
October 9, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 11 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 $5.72. 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 send a copy of this Order to the Trust Fund Officer at the St. Clair County Jail upon entry of this Order. Signed by Judge J. Phil Gilbert on 10/9/2020. (tjk)THIS TEXT ENTRY IS AN ORDER OF THE COURT. NO FURTHER DOCUMENTATION WILL BE MAILED.
October 8, 2020 Filing 10 Prisoner Trust Fund Account Statement. (jaj)
October 5, 2020 Filing 9 CONSENT/NON-CONSENT TO U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE - sealed pending receipt from all parties. (jaj)
September 30, 2020 Filing 8 DECLARATION of Carjuan D. Adkins. (jaj)
September 28, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 7 ORDER: In the #1 Complaint, Plaintiff seeks (among other things) a preliminary injunction, in the form of an order for his release from custody due to his recent struggles with COVID-19, high blood pressure, and secondhand e-cigarette smoke exposure. Although Plaintiff properly challenges the conditions of his confinement pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983, it is well settled that release from custody is not an available remedy for a state prisoner suing under Section 1983. Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475, 500 (1973); Graham v. Broglin, 922 F.2d 379, 380-81 (7th Cir. 1991). The appropriate remedy for Section 1983 claims arising from unconstitutional conditions of confinement or the denial of medical care include an order for proper medical treatment and/or an award of money damages. Crites v. Madison Cnty. Jail, 2018 WL 1832919, at *2 (S.D. Ill. 2018) (citations omitted). Plaintiff's request for release from custody is DENIED. This Order does not preclude Plaintiff from submitting a separate motion for preliminary injunction in this case to request specific medical care or changes to the conditions of his confinement. This Order also does not prevent him from pursuing a request for release in his pending state criminal case, a state or federal habeas action, or any other type of action. The Court will issue a separate screening order once review of the Complaint is completed under 28 U.S.C. 1915A. Plaintiff's request for money damages survives this order. Signed by Judge J. Phil Gilbert on 9/28/2020. (jsy) THIS TEXT ENTRY IS AN ORDER OF THE COURT. NO FURTHER DOCUMENTATION WILL BE MAILED.
September 28, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 6 ORDER: Plaintiff has filed a Motion for Leave to Proceed in Forma Pauperis ("IFP") in this case (see Doc. #2 ), but has failed to provide the necessary prisoner trust fund account information as required by the PLRA to determine whether the inmate is entitled to proceed without prepaying fees and costs. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1915(b)(1), the Court must review the prisoner trust fund account statement for the 6 month period immediately preceding the filing of this action. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff shall provide the Clerk of Court with the attached certification completed by the Trust Fund Officer at the facility and a copy of his/her trust fund account statement (or institutional equivalent) for the period 3/1/2020 to 9/25/2020 no later than 45 days from the date of this order. Failure to do so will result in dismissal of this action for failure to comply with an Order of this Court. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). See generally Ladien v. Astrachan, 128 F.3d 1051 (7th Cir. 1997); Johnson v. Kamminga, 34 F.3d 466 (7th Cir. 1994). The Clerk is DIRECTED to mail a copy of this Order and the certification form to the Trust Fund Officer at St. Clair County Jail. (Trust Fund Statement due on or before 11/12/2020). Signed by Judge J. Phil Gilbert on 9/28/2020. (tjk)
September 25, 2020 Filing 5 MOTION for Recruitment of Counsel by Carjuan D. Adkins. (jsm2)
September 25, 2020 Filing 4 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 09/25/2020. Consent due by 10/16/2020. (jsm2)
September 25, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 3 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-cv-986-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 9/25/2020. (jsm2)THIS TEXT ENTRY IS AN ORDER OF THE COURT. NO FURTHER DOCUMENTATION WILL BE MAILED.
September 25, 2020 Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Carjuan D. Adkins. (jsm2)
September 25, 2020 Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants filed by Carjuan D. Adkins. (Attachments: #1 Declaration).(jsm2)

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 this case: Adkins v. Watson et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: John Doe
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Richard Watson
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Dr. David
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: David Marcowitz
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Trinity Service Group
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Carjuan D. Adkins
Represented By: Steven S. Wasserman
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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.


Why Is My Information Online?