Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

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

Staten v. Johnson

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS


October 16, 2007

JAMES E. STATEN, PLAINTIFF,
v.
JOSEPH JOHNSON, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

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

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

On August 20, 2007, Plaintiff James E. Staten filed suit in this Court . With his complaint (Doc. 1), Plaintiff filed a motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 2), a motion to appoint counsel (Doc. 3) and a motion for service of process at Government expense (Doc. 4).

By granting a motion for pauper status, a federal court authorizes a lawsuit to proceed without prepayment of fees. Title 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) requires federal courts to carefully screen the complaints filed by pauper status movants. Pursuant to § 1915(e)(2), this Court must dismiss any complaint if (a) the allegation of poverty is untrue, (b) the action is frivolous or malicious, (c) the action fails to state a claims upon which relief can be granted, or (d) the action seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief. Id.

In reviewing Plaintiff's complaint, this Court bears in mind that it must construe pro se complaints liberally. Ciarpaglini v. Saini, 352 F.3d 328, 330 (7th Cir. 2003). More specifically, the Court accepts any factual allegations in the complaint as true and draws all reasonable inferences in Plaintiff's favor. See Jogi v. Voges, 425 F.3d 367, 371 (7th Cir. 2005). Even viewing Plaintiff's allegations in this favorable light, the instant action fails to pass muster under § 1915(e)(2) because it fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted by this Court.

Plaintiff is confined at the Alton Mental Health facility pursuant to an order issued by a state court finding that Plaintiff was a person subject to involuntary administration of psychotropic medication. See Staten v. Officer, No. 3:07CV570-GPM (S.D. Il.). Plaintiff's complaint is largely nonsensical. Additionally, Plaintiff's complaint does not include any specific allegations against defendants Joseph Johnson, Karen Johnson, or Jani-King. "A plaintiff cannot state a claim against a defendant by including the defendant's name in the caption." Collins v. Kibort, 143 F.3d 331, 334 (7th Cir. 1998).

Accordingly, Plaintiff's complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Therefore, pursuant to § 1915(e)(2), the Court DENIES Plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 2) and DISMISSES this cause of action, with prejudice. Plaintiff's motion to appoint counsel, (Doc. 3) and his motion for service of process at Government expense (Doc. 4) are DENIED. This case is now closed.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

David R Herndon Chief Judge United States District Court

20071016

© 1992-2007 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

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