The opinion of the court was delivered by: Stiehl, District Judge:
Before the Court is a motion to dismiss plaintiff Robert Dale Lamon's amended complaint filed by defendants Donald E. Sandidge; Alan Napp; Schrempf, Kelly, Napp & Darr, Ltd. ("Schrempf Law Firm"); the City of Alton, Illinois; and the Alton Police Department (Doc. 19). Plaintiff's original complaint made various allegations of race discrimination under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, but the Court could not discern who did what to whom and dismissed the complaint, sua sponte, for failure to state a claim (Doc. 5). Defendants now move to dismiss plaintiff's amended complaint under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b) and (c).*fn1 Plaintiff has not responded.
Plaintiff Robert Dale Lamon filed a previous lawsuit against the defendants Donald E. Sandidge, the City of Alton, and the Alton Police Department in this Court in 2005 (Case No. 05-CV-745). Among other things, he alleged that Sandidge, as the mayor of Alton, allowed the Alton police to arrest him without probable cause for operating a business without a license. Sandidge also allegedly allowed employees of the City to harass plaintiff. The Court dismissed the complaint, sua sponte, for failure to state a federal claim (Doc. 3, 05-CV-00745). On appeal, the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit vacated this Court's dismissal in part and remanded, finding that plaintiff had stated a claim against Sandidge and the City for allegedly authorizing the police to arrest plaintiff without probable cause. See Lamon v. Sandidge, 232 Fed. App'x 592, 594 (7th Cir. 2007). On remand, this Court dismissed plaintiff's action for want of prosecution (Doc. 23, Case No. 05-CV-745). His appeal was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction (Doc. 28, 05-CV-745).*fn2
Plaintiff next sued Sandidge and the City of Alton in the Circuit Court of the Third Judicial Circuit, Madison County, Illinois, in 2008, case no. 08-CH-1288 (Doc. 19, Ex. A). There he alleged corruption, dishonesty, conspiracy, having been denied a business license, and wrongful arrest and detention in 2005 (id., pp. 2--3). The court granted defendants' motion to dismiss, allowed plaintiff to amend his complaint (Doc. 19, Ex. D), yet ultimately dismissed the amended complaint with prejudice (Doc. 19, Ex. E).
When plaintiff filed his original complaint in this action, the Court dismissed it, sua sponte, for failure to state a claim (Doc. 5). In doing so, the Court instructed plaintiff that his 2005 lawsuit had been dismissed for want of prosecution and this one could not be a do-over. Further, plaintiff had not established a basis for supporting any claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The Court gave plaintiff 20 days to amend his complaint and ordered that the amended complaint "shall more clearly set forth dates and actions of the respective defendants, including how their actions violated [plaintiff's] rights" (Doc. 5).
In his amended complaint now before the Court, plaintiff alleges violations of due process and equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment (Doc. 6). He states he is a qualified member of a protected group, and a "team of white men" has discriminated against him. He seeks compensatory and punitive damages, as well as injunctive relief, and demands a jury trial.
Plaintiff asserts that defendant Alan Napp, an attorney,*fn3
committed fraud on the court when he obtained three judgments
against plaintiff on November 7, 2008, in the Circuit Court of the
Third Judicial Circuit, Madison County, Illinois, case nos.
04-OV-100533, 04-OV-100534, 05-OV-101079 (Doc. 6, Ex. 1, p. 16).
Plaintiff attaches a letter he wrote to the Illinois Attorney
Registration and Disciplinary Commission accusing Napp of
"prosecutorial misconduct" and claiming Napp's fraud on the court
consisted of "egregious conduct that undermined the integrity of the
judicial process."*fn4 He says these are the same
charges that were dismissed by the Court before, including one for
operating without a city license. Plaintiff says the notice "was
constructed to follow a string of docket calls," after which Napp
allegedly entered one of the judgments against plaintiff without a
court date or hearing. James Schrempf of the Schrempf Law Firm, Napp's
employer, testified in the circuit court that he was letting Napp
handle the matter. Schrempf's testimony, plaintiff alleges, validated
Napp's intent to commit fraud on the court. Plaintiff goes on to say
he is seeking injunctive relief and that he has demonstrated "over and
over again" that he has no adequate remedy at law. He
claims he was "convicted" on March 25, 2009, by Judge Grounds. He
adds, however, that he has never been convicted of any charges
referenced in this matter "but the court is imposing punishment upon
[him] as if the legated [sic] charges were convictions" (Doc. 6, p.
2). The court order attached to his amended complaint actually vacates
the three judgments against him, on March 25, 2009. It says the court
did not have the authority to enter the previous orders against
plaintiff, which were entered in his absence, in light of his demand
for a jury trial and having paid the appropriate fee (Doc. 6, Ex. 1,
p. 16). The court directed each case to be docketed on the next
available jury docket.
Plaintiff alleges that the Alton police arrested him without probable cause for operating a business without a license. He includes the booking sheet from his arrest, which states "Lamon was observed on the property . being a prior business operated and owned by Robert D. Lamon" (id., p. 17). The police took him into custody on August 8, 2005, gave him notice to appear (id., p. 11), then released him. Plaintiff also includes a letter to Sandidge dated January 2005 protesting Sandige's "arbitrary constructive decision" to deny his petition for a business license (id., p. 14).
Plaintiff next accuses Sandidge, the City's administration, Alice Martin, and Jeff Weishaupt of using the false judgments Napp entered to disqualify plaintiff from running for public office and to cause him public embarrassment.
Finally, plaintiff expresses disappointment with the undersigned district judge throughout the amended complaint. He accuses the undersigned of suppressing evidence and committing fraud. He complains that Judge Duff of the circuit court and the undersigned continually dismiss his lawsuits. He objects to the Court's having changed the name of the lawsuit to Lamon v. Sandidge and having directed plaintiff to provide an address for Sandidge. He also asserts that the Court has violated due process under the color of law by denying him discovery, a process server, and the right to face his accusers.
Plaintiff's amended complaint is not easy to follow and does not set out his legal theories, other than generally alleging violations of due process and equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment and discrimination under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.*fn5 The Court construes his potential claims as follows:
1. Napp committed fraud on the court in procuring three judgments against plaintiff in state court,
2. The police did not have probable cause to arrest plaintiff for operating a business without a license,
3. Sandidge, the City administration, Martin, and Weishaupt used the three judgments against plaintiff to disqualify him ...