NAYLOR v. SANFORD et al
| JOHN NAYLOR |
| INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS and SANFORD |
| 1:2019cv03766 |
| September 4, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
| Tim A Baker |
| Jane Magnus-Stinson |
| Prisoner Petitions - Prison Condition |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 10, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 15 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed, filed by SANFORD. SANFORD waiver sent on 9/16/2019. (Slinker, Mollie) |
| Filing 14 NOTICE of Appearance by Brandon Alan Skates on behalf of Defendant SANFORD. (Skates, Brandon) |
| Filing 13 NOTICE of Appearance by Mollie Ann Slinker on behalf of Defendant SANFORD. (Slinker, Mollie) |
| Filing 12 Documents for Service by IDOC to Officer Sanford - re #10 NOTICE of Lawsuit & Waiver Issued by Clerk, #1 Complaint, #9 Order. (JDH) |
Filing 11
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR COUNSEL - Given the massive amount of pro se prisoner litigation, it is simply impossible to recruit pro bono counsel for each of these cases. For these reasons, the plaintiff is simply not one of the many pro se prisoners that requires the assistance of counsel. The plaintiff is competent to litigate this action himself. Accordingly, the motions for counsel, dkt. #3 , is denied. To the extent the plaintiff's conditions hamper his ability to comply with deadlines in this action, he may file a motion for extension of time when needed. (See Order). Copy to John Naylor via U.S. mail. Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 9/13/2019. (JDH)
|
| Filing 10 NOTICE of Lawsuit & Waiver Issued by Clerk. (JDH) |
|
Filing 9
ORDER SCREENING COMPLAINT AND DIRECTING SERVICE OF PROCESS - Applying the screening standard to the factual allegations in the complaint certain claims are dismissed while other claims shall proceed as submitted. First, all claims against the IDOC are dismissed. Although the plaintiff names the IDOC as a defendant, he does not provide any allegations against the IDOC. But even if he did, his claim for damages against the IDOC would be barred by the Eleventh Amendment. A suit against a state agency is treated as a suit against the state itself for Eleventh Amendment purposes, and the Eleventh Amendment immunizes an unconsenting state from suits for damages in federal court. Second, any claims based on the PREA or failure to comply with its guidelines are dismissed because the PREA does not create a private right of action. Finally, to the extent the plaintiff has raised a deliberate indifference claim based on Officer Sanford's failure to sign a PREA form, such claim is dismissed for failure to state a claim. Any allegation that the lack of signature indicates that Officer Sanford was inadequately trained to handle a PREA investigation is merely speculative. The plaintiff's claim that Officer Sanford retaliated against him for alleging a PREA violation shall proceed as a First Amendment retaliation claim against the defendant. This claim is the only viable claim identified by the Court. If the plaintiff believes that additional claims were alleged in the complaint, but not identified by the Court, he shall have through October 10, 2019, in which to identify those claims. The clerk is directed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(3) to issue process to defendant Officer Sanford in the manner specified by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(d). Process shall consist of the complaint (docket 1), applicable forms (Notice of Lawsuit and Request for Waiver of Service of Summons and Waiver of Service of Summons), and this Order. The clerk is directed to serve the defendant electronically. Because all claims against the IDOC have been dismissed, the clerk is directed to terminate the IDOC as a defendant on the docket. (See Order). Copy to John Naylor via U.S. mail. Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 9/13/2019.(JDH) Modified on 9/13/2019 (JDH).
|
| Filing 8 NOTICE to Pro se Litigant - The following information is provided to pro se litigants to inform them about rules and procedures governing how they communicate with the Court. (Copy sent to plaintiff via US mail). (JRT) |
|
Filing 7
ORDER Directing Monthly Payments be made from Prison Account of John Naylor. (See Order). Copies to John Naylor and Warden, Pendleton Correctional Facility via U.S. mail. Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 9/11/2019.(JDH)
|
|
Filing 6
Order on In Forma Pauperis Status - The plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis, dkt. #2 , is granted. Although the plaintiff is excused from pre-paying the full filing fee, he still must pay the three hundred and fifty dollar ($350.00) filing fee pursuant to the statutory formula set forth in 28 U.S.C. 1915(b)(2) when able. See 28 U.S.C. 1915(b)(1) ("the prisoner shall be required to pay the full amount of a filing fee."). The Court will separately issue a collection order to facilitate the payment of the filing fee. Copy to John Naylor via U.S. mail. Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 9/11/2019. (JDH)
|
| Filing 5 MAGISTRATE JUDGE's NOTICE of Availability to Exercise Jurisdiction issued. (AKH) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE of Tort Claim, filed by Plaintiff JOHN NAYLOR (AKH) |
| Filing 3 MOTION for Assistance with Recruiting Counsel, filed by Plaintiff JOHN NAYLOR. (AKH) |
| Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis, filed by Plaintiff JOHN NAYLOR. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Offender Trust System Summary). (AKH) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, SANFORD, filed by JOHN NAYLOR. (No fee paid with this filing). (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Offender Grievance Reports, #2 Exhibit Checklist, #3 Affidavit). (AKH) |
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 Indiana 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.
