The opinion of the court was delivered by: MATTHEW KENNELLY, District Judge
*fn1 Defendant John Stroger, Jr., was dismissed from this action
in the Court's order of March 24, 2005.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Jeffrey E. Johnson, an inmate at Dixon Correctional
Center, brings this pro se complaint pursuant to
42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging that while he was detained at Cook County Jail, he
was not allowed to obtain a subscription to a newspaper directly
from the publisher, in alleged violation of his First Amendment
Defendants Michael Sheahan, Chester Plaxio, and Scott Kurtovich
have moved to dismiss. Johnson has filed an objection to the
motion to dismiss, a motion opposing the motion to dismiss, a
motion in opposition to the motion to dismiss, and a supplemental
motion opposing the motion to dismiss. These multiple responses
are somewhat repetitious but also contain different arguments.
Neither the Court nor the defendants should have to ferret
through four separate responses to ascertain Johnson's arguments.
In the future, Johnson may submit only one response to any motion the defendants file.
For the following reasons, the Court denies defendants' motion
When considering a motion to dismiss for failure to state a
claim, the Court accepts the plaintiff's allegations as true,
Hishon v. King & Spalding, 467 U.S. 69, 73 (1984), and
construes any ambiguities in the complaint in the plaintiff's
favor. Thompson v. Ill. Dep't of Prof. Regulation,
300 F.3d 750, 753 (7th Cir. 2002). Pro se complaints are liberally
construed "and [are] not held to the stringent standards expected
of pleadings drafted by lawyers." McCormick v. City of Chicago,
230 F.3d 319, 325 (7th Cir. 2000). The Court may grant a motion
to dismiss only if "it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff
can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would
entitle him to relief." Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 45-46
(1957). A court may take judicial notice of matters of public
record without converting a 12(b)(6) motion into a motion for
summary judgment. Anderson v. Simon, 217 F.3d 472, 474-75 (7th
Cir. 2000); Henson v. CSC Credit Services, 29 F.3d 280, 284
(7th Cir. 1994).
Johnson alleges that while he was housed in Division 1 of the
Cook County Jail, he was not allowed to obtain a newspaper
subscription directly from the publisher. He filed a grievance,
to no avail. When Johnson was transferred to Division 6, he
noticed that other inmates were allowed to have foreign
newspapers. He asked to be allowed to receive U.S.A. Today, the
Wall Street Journal, Jewish Exponent, and the Christian
Science Monitor. Defendants denied his request. 2. Analysis
Defendants argue that Johnson failed to list all the lawsuits
he has filed as directed in the complaint form required by Local
Rule 81.1, which they argue requires dismissal; that at least
three of the cases Johnson filed were dismissed on grounds that
they were frivolous, malicious, or failed to state a claim, which
also requires dismissal; that he fails to state a claim against
defendants in their individual capacities; and that he fails to
state a claim against defendants in their official capacities.
a. Failure to list all lawsuits
Defendants point out that on his original complaint, Johnson
listed one action he had filed previously, Johnson v. Horn,
150 F.3d 276 (3d Cir. 1998). However, their search of cases filed in
other courts revealed thirteen cases or appeals that Johnson had
filed. In his responses, Johnson argues that did not file three
of those cases. In reply, defendants note that Johnson identified
in his responses two additional cases he had filed.
After initially reviewing the motion to dismiss and Johnson's
responses, the Court decided that it needed more information from
Johnson in order to determine how many cases he had filed. The
Court noted that the U.S Party/Case Index listed 114 matches for
prisoner cases filed by "Jeffrey Johnson." Even after eliminating
cases filed by "Jeffrey Johnsons" with middle initials other than
"E" or middle names other than "Earl," some fifty-nine cases
remained. The Court through its own research found Johnson v.
Daiwa Bank Trust Company, 96 CV 7315 (S.D.N.Y. 1996), a case
which neither Johnson nor defendants had mentioned. It also
appeared that Johnson may have filed some cases while
incarcerated in Georgia and Florida.
On July 19, 2005, the Court ordered Johnson to provide the
following information: First, plaintiff must provide all names ...