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.

Cedric Dupree v. Joshua Fritz

August 23, 2011

CEDRIC DUPREE, PLAINTIFF,
v.
JOSHUA FRITZ, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Donald G. Wilkerson United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER FOLLOWING BENCH TRIAL

Having considered the evidence introduced and the legal arguments made at the one-day bench trial held on August 22, 2011, the Court makes the following findings of facts and conclusion of law.

FINDINGS OF FACT

Plaintiff, Cedric Dupree, is currently incarcerated within the Illinois Department of Corrections at Pontiac Correctional Center. Plaintiff brings the instant matter pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging that Defendants Joshua Fritz, John Mohr, Brian Thomas, David Holder, George Holton and Michael Schnicker violated his First and Eighth Amendment rights during his incarceration at Menard Correctional Center ("Menard").

Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint (Doc. 145)

In Count I of his Second Amended Complaint, Plaintiff alleges that on October 3, and 4, 2006, Defendant Brian Thomas maliciously and sadistically for purposes of causing harm twisted and pulled down on Plaintiff's handcuffs. Plaintiff alleges these acts were taken to retaliate against him for successfully bringing a lawsuit against staff at Pontiac Correctional Center.

Plaintiff also alleges on May 6, 2008, Defendants David Holder, George Holton, and Michael Schnicker maliciously and sadistically for purposes of causing harm handcuffed the Plaintiff, beat him, and tore his toenails out of his feet. Plaintiff alleges these acts were taken to retaliate against him for successfully bringing a lawsuit against staff at Pontiac Correctional Center. Finally, Plaintiff alleges in Count I that Defendants Holder, Holton, and Schicker denied the Plaintiff access to medical care for a serious medical need on May 6, 2008, to retaliate against him for successfully bringing a lawsuit against staff at Pontiac Correctional Center.

Plaintiff alleges in Count II that on September 19, 2006, Defendant Joshua Fritz maliciously and sadistically for purposes of causing harm slapped Plaintiff in the face and stomped on his toes in violation of the Eighth Amendment.

Plaintiff alleges in Count III that on September 19, 2006, Defendant John Mohr was deliberately indifferent to Plaintiff's panic attack and wrist cutting by denying the Plaintiff access to health care in violation of the Eighth Amendment.

Plaintiff alleges in Count V that on May 6, 2008, Defendants Holder, Holton, and Schnicker maliciously and sadistically for purposes of causing harm handcuffed the Plaintiff, beat him, and tore his toenails out of his feet in violation of the Eighth Amendment.

Plaintiff alleges in Count VI that on May 6, 2008, Defendants Holder, Holton, and Schnicker were deliberately indifferent to Plaintiff by leaving him lying in his cell bleeding and unconscious after the alleged attack without providing him access to health care in violation of the Eighth Amendment.

Defendants Holder, Holton, Schnicker, Thomas and Fritz deny that any act or omission on their part violated the Plaintiff's constitutional rights. Defendants deny each allegation made by the Plaintiff. Specifically, Defendants deny taking any action out of retaliation against the Plaintiff. Defendants deny taking any action maliciously and sadistically for purposes of harming the Plaintiff. Defendants deny Plaintiff suffered from a serious medical need for which immediate medical treatment was denied. Defendants deny preventing the Plaintiff from accessing medical treatment at Menard Correctional Center.

Bench Trial

During the bench trial on August 22, 2011, the following evidence placed Plaintiff's ...


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.