Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Griffin v. Blagojevich

January 3, 2007

DWAYNE GRIFFIN, INMATE #N03392, PLAINTIFF,
v.
ROD R. BLAGOJEVICH, ROGER E. WALKER, JR., TOM W. WEGER, SHERRY BENTON, JUDY NASH, STEVE CROMWIN, APRIL WAMPLER, RON SCHON, C/O MICHL, C/O BUNTEN, B/O CUTRIGHT, C/O PARKER, C/O DECKER, C/O HANCE, C/O MYERS, C/O DIRICE, AND KATHLEEN HIGHSMITH, DEFENDANTS.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Herndon, District Judge

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Plaintiff, a former inmate in the Robinson Correctional Center, brings this action for deprivations of his constitutional rights pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This case is now before the Court for a preliminary review of the complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, which provides:

(a) Screening.-- The court shall review, before docketing, if feasible or, in any event, as soon as practicable after docketing, a complaint in a civil action in which a prisoner seeks redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity.

(b) Grounds for Dismissal.-- On review, the court shall identify cognizable claims or dismiss the complaint, or any portion of the complaint, if the complaint--

(1) is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted; or

(2) seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief.

28 U.S.C. § 1915A. An action or claim is frivolous if "it lacks an arguable basis either in law or in fact." Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989). Upon careful review of the complaint and any supporting exhibits, the Court finds it appropriate to exercise its authority under § 1915A; this action is legally frivolous and thus subject to summary dismissal.

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

Plaintiff states that between February 18, 2005, and December 29, 2005, 13 pieces of legal correspondence were opened by Defendants and resealed prior to delivery to Plaintiff.

1) A letter from the clerk of the circuit court of Cook County, Illinois, postmarked February 22, 2005, was opened and resealed with staples and delivered to Plaintiff on February 25, 2005.

2) A letter from the clerk of the circuit court of Cook County, Illinois, postmarked March 1, 2005, was opened, resealed, and delivered by Defendant Decker on March 3, 2005.

3) A letter from the clerk of the circuit court of Cook County, Illinois, was opened and resealed by Defendant Decker on an unspecified date.

4) A letter from the clerk of the Illinois Supreme Court, postmarked October 22, 2005, was opened, resealed, and delivered by Defendant Hance on an unspecified date.

5) A letter from the clerk of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, postmarked November 30, 2005, was opened, resealed, and ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.