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.

Johnson v. Shah

United States District Court, S.D. Illinois

March 28, 2017

TAVARIS JOHNSON, Plaintiff,
v.
VIPIN SHAH, et al., Defendants.

          MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

          Staci M. Yandle, District Judge

         Before the Court are Motions for Summary Judgment for Failure to Exhaust Administrative Remedies filed by Defendant Vipin Shah (Doc. 41) and Defendants Suzann Bailey, Thomas Spiller, Marcus Hardy and John Baldwin (Doc. 44).[1] For the following reasons, Defendants' motions are GRANTED.

         Background

         Plaintiff is an inmate at Pinckneyville Correctional Center (“Pinckneyville”). Defendant Vipin Shah worked as a physician at Pinckneyville and Defendant Spiller was the Warden. Defendants Baldwin, Hardy and Bailey served in administrative positions for the Illinois Department of Corrections. Plaintiff filed this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging violations of his constitutional rights (Doc. 1). On March 4, 2016, the Court screened the First Amended Complaint, designating Plaintiff's claims as follows:

Count 1: Eighth Amendment claim against Defendants Baldwin, Hardy, Spiller, and Shah for deliberate indifference to Plaintiff's need for adequate food to meet his nutritional needs.
Count 3: Conspiracy claim against Defendants Baldwin, Hardy, Spiller, and Dr. Shah for attempting to punish prisoners and profit from them by implementing a “two-meal-per-day” policy at Pinckneyville Correctional Center.
Count 4: Eighth Amendment claim against Defendants Baldwin, Hardy, Bailey, and Shah, for endangering Plaintiff's health by serving him a soy diet.

(Doc. 17).

         Defendants have moved for summary judgment for Plaintiff's failure to exhaust administrative remedies, arguing that Plaintiff submitted no grievances relevant to his claims. Plaintiff did not file a response.

         Discussion

         In support of their motion, Defendants submitted authenticated records from the Illinois Department of Corrections and Pinckneyville Correctional Center, which indicate:

1. On May 3, 2015, a counselor returned and responded to Plaintiff's grievance regarding the soy diet.
2. On June 23, 2015, Plaintiff submitted a grievance regarding Dr. Shah's medical treatment of his back and medical co-pay, which was denied.
3. On September 4, 2015, Plaintiff submitted an appeal of the grievance regarding Dr. Shah's medical treatment to the ...

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.