Lewis v. Parker et al
Plaintiff: Labarian Lewis
Defendant: Heather Parker, Joni Fischer, Angel Ingram, Dr. Tham, Joni Fisher, Dr Than and Angela Cowell
Case Number: 3:2022cv00595
Filed: March 24, 2022
Court: U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois
Presiding Judge: Nancy J Rosenstengel
Nature of Suit: Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on May 31, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
May 17, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 17 ORDER: Plaintiff has filed a Motion for Leave to Proceed in Forma Pauperis ("IFP") in this case (see Doc. #15 ), 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 9/1/2021 to 3/24/2022 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 Chester Mental Health Center. (Trust Fund Statement due on or before 7/1/2022). Signed by Chief Judge Nancy J. Rosenstengel on 5/17/2022. (tjk)
May 16, 2022 Filing 16 AMENDED COMPLAINT against Defendants by Labarian Lewis.(jaj)
May 16, 2022 Filing 15 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Labarian Lewis. (jaj)
May 16, 2022 Filing 14 CONSENT/NON-CONSENT TO U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE - sealed pending receipt from all parties. (jaj)
May 10, 2022 Filing 13 Letter from Plaintiff to the Court. (jaj)
May 10, 2022 Filing 12 NOTICE OF CASE ASSIGNMENT/REASSIGNMENT: Pursuant to Administrative Order No. 257, this case will remain with the assigned Chief Judge Nancy J. Rosenstengel. This Notice does not alter any prior referrals of motions or matters pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 636(b)(1-3). (jaj)THIS TEXT ENTRY IS AN ORDER OF THE COURT. NO FURTHER DOCUMENTATION WILL BE MAILED.
May 10, 2022 Filing 11 CONSENT/NON-CONSENT TO U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE - sealed pending receipt from all parties. (jaj)
May 3, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 10 ORDER: Plaintiff is ORDERED to file a Motion for Leave to Proceed IFP or pay the $402.00 filing fee for this case on or before May 10, 2022. In addition, Plaintiff shall file a formal Complaint on or before May 10, 2022. Failure to comply with this Order will result in dismissal of this action for want of prosecution and/or for failure to comply with a court order under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) without further notice. (Action due by 5/10/2022). Signed by Chief Judge Nancy J. Rosenstengel on 5/3/2022. (tjk)
April 29, 2022 Filing 9 Mail Returned as Undeliverable. Documents 6 & 7 sent to Labarian Lewis. (jaj)
April 28, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 8 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE: Consistent with Administrative Order No. 257, Lewis was previously directed to file the attached form indicating consent to proceed before the Magistrate Judge or an affirmative declination to consent. The time for doing so has long passed, and in spite of a warning and additional time to do so, said party continues to ignore the Court's directive by not returning the form. Thus, Lewis is ordered to SHOW CAUSE why sanctions should not be imposed for failure to file the attached form as is required under Administrative Order No. 257. Show Cause Response re Consent due by 5/12/2022. Signed by Chief Judge Nancy J. Rosenstengel on 4/28/2022. (tjk)
April 14, 2022 Filing 7 NOTICE: Plaintiff was directed to file the attached form regarding consenting or declining to consent to magistrate judge jurisdiction. The time for doing so has now passed, and the Court has not received the form. As required by Administrative Order No. 257, Plaintiff shall return the form within 7 days or face possible sanctions. Consent due by 4/21/2022 (kare)
April 13, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 6 ORDER re #5 Letter. The Court recently received a letter from Plaintiff. The letter is incomprehensible and includes the names of his parents, the amount of siblings he has, and the Court's phone number. The only line of particular relevance to this case is the statement "filing fee and cash buy a lawyer". The Court notes that Plaintiff has also returned blank forms for a motion to proceed without prepayment of fees and a blank consent form. Both documents were sent to him on March 24, 2022 with instructions to fill out and return the documents (Docs. 2 and 3). Plaintiff is reminded that the deadline for returning the documents and/or paying the filing fee is April 25, 2022. Plaintiff is also directed to submit his Complaint by April 25, 2022 (See Doc. 4). Finally, the Court notes that Plaintiff's filings came from a new address not on file with the Court. Plaintiff was previously advised that if his address changed, he was to notify the Court within seven days of the change by filing a Notice of Change of Address. He was also warned that failure to update his address could result in the dismissal of his claims. The Court has updated Plaintiff's address based on the return address in his letter. Plaintiff is again reminded that failure to follow the Court's Orders, including deadlines and directives, will result in the dismissal of his case. Signed by Chief Judge Nancy J. Rosenstengel on 4/13/2022. (anp)THIS TEXT ENTRY IS AN ORDER OF THE COURT. NO FURTHER DOCUMENTATION WILL BE MAILED.
April 11, 2022 Filing 5 Letter from Plaintiff (kare)
March 25, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 4 ORDER re #1 Complaint filed by Labarian Lewis. Plaintiff recently filed a letter with the Court which was construed as a new case. He raises a number of unrelated allegations and states his intention to file a lawsuit. He also submitted a second letter, construed as a supplement, which appears to be a letter to an attorney asking to take his case. It is not clear whether Plaintiff intended the letters to be filed as a Complaint. He states that he wants to file a lawsuit but also labels his second page a new case. But neither filing could stand as a formal Complaint. Accordingly, Plaintiff has until April 25, 2022 to inform the Court whether or not he intended to file a Complaint. If Plaintiff did not intend to file a Complaint, the Court will close the case and no filing fee will be assessed. If Plaintiff did intend to file a lawsuit, he shall so inform the Court and submit a formal Complaint for the Court's review by April 25, 2022. To aid Plaintiff in this task, the Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to send Plaintiff a Section 1983 Complaint form. Complaint due by 4/25/2022. Signed by Chief Judge Nancy J. Rosenstengel on 3/25/2022. (anp)THIS TEXT ENTRY IS AN ORDER OF THE COURT. NO FURTHER DOCUMENTATION WILL BE MAILED.
March 24, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 3 NOTICE AND ORDER: The Court has received your Complaint. Your case number is 22-595-NJR. Within 30 days of the entry of this Order, you are ORDERED to submit the $402.00 filing fee or a motion to proceed without prepayment of the filing fee. If you file a motion to proceed without prepayment of the filing fee, the Court must review your trust fund account statement for the six-month period immediately preceding the filing of this action. Thus, you must have the Trust Fund Officer at your facility complete the attached certification and provide a copy of your trust fund account statement (or institutional equivalent). If you fail to pay the filing fee or submit the motion to proceed without prepayment of the filing fee by the deadline, the case will be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. FED. R. CIV. P. 41(b); Sperow v. Melvin, 153 F.3d 780, 781 (7th Cir. 1998). 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 Chief Judge Nancy J. Rosenstengel on 3/24/2022. (jaj)
March 24, 2022 Filing 2 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 3/24/2022. Consent due by 4/14/2022 (jaj)
March 24, 2022 Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants filed by Labarian Lewis.(jaj) (Additional attachment(s) added on 3/24/2022: #1 Supplement) (jaj).

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 Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Lewis v. Parker et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Labarian Lewis
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: Heather Parker
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: Joni Fischer
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: Angel Ingram
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. Tham
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: Joni Fisher
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 Than
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: Angela Cowell
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?