United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, Eastern Division
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
VIRGINIA M. KENDALL UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
James Ayot brings his Complaint for RICO violations against
the DuPage State's Attorney; Paula Ciesieki, Clerk of the
DuPage County Court; Patrick Collins; Marissa Spencer;
Jessica Sissler; Norman Hall; Kenneth Tataralis; DuPage
Probation; and Judge Joseph Bugos. Ayot's complaint is a
refiling of allegations that have been dismissed in six
different cases in federal court. Even if this complaint were
not barred by res judicata, the previous complaints were
properly dismissed for failure to state a claim due to
defendant's qualified immunity and under principles of
res judicata and this rehashed version is similarly flawed.
Ayot cannot bring a new complaint after the dismissal of his
previous cases, even if he has a new theory, because he was
obligated to bring all of those claims at the time he first
charged the complaint. Ayot has a history of filing frivolous
claims and is warned that his frivolous filings may result in
having him barred from future filings.
instant case marks the latest of many chapters in James
Ayot's crusade as a pro se litigant to right
what he perceives to be the wrongs inflicted upon him due to
his arrest for domestic violence. All of these cases
initially arise from a dispute with his then-girlfriend,
Sharlene Rice, a dispute that resulted in Ayot's arrest
on suspicion of domestic violence. Since his time in jail for
the domestic violence charge, between October 17-19, 2015,
Ayot has had several interactions with the Naperville Police
Department and DuPage entities. In his subsequent civil
cases, he alleges that he was wronged in various ways: by
false claims made by the DuPage State's Attorney's
office, improper medical care he received while incarcerated,
an imposed bond that he believes constituted extortion, and
his name allegedly remaining on an offender website after the
domestic violence charges had been dismissed which, he
claims, constitutes libel.
lawsuits against various Naperville officials and DuPage
entities began in state court. On May 26, 2016, in the
Circuit Court of DuPage County, Ayot sued the Naperville
Police Department for “misconduct/negligence and
selective enforcement[.]” See Ayot v. Naperville
Police, No. 16 L 483 (Cir. Ct. DuPage Cnty., Ill.). On
June 8, 2016, in a separate suit in DuPage County Court that
was originally brought by Ayot's ex-girlfriend against
him, Ayot received leave to file a counterclaim and docketed
a third-party complaint against “Naperville
Police” for “misconduct/negligence and selective
enforcement.” Rice v. Ayot, No. 16 L 454 (Cir.
Ct. DuPage Cnty). The counterclaim was identical to the
complaint in Case 16 L 483, except for that he increased the
amount of damages sought from $1, 121, 172 to $4, 000, 000.
On June 16, 2016, Ayot voluntarily dismissed Case 16 L 483
and the same day, the state court struck Ayot's claims
against the city. Then, on June 27, 2016, Ayot filed suit in
the Circuit Court of Cook County alleging negligent police
misconduct, again based on the events alleged in Case 16 L
483 and 16 L 454. Ayot v. Naperville Police, No. 16
L 6329 (Cir. Ct. Cook County., Ill.).
failing to receive relief in state court, Ayot began his
federal lawsuits last year. Excluding the instant case, Ayot
has filed ten lawsuits in federal court. All have been
dismissed except for three which remain pending in the
initial stages of litigation, two which were filed today.
See Ayot v. City of Naperville, 16 C 10083 (N.D.
Ill. 2016) (dismissed with prejudice); see also Ayot v.
Dupage SAO, 16 C 10086 (N.D. Ill. 2016) (dismissed with
prejudice); see also Ayot v. DuPage County, 17 C
4401 (N.D. Ill. 2017) (dismissed with prejudice); see
also Ayot v. Naperville Police, 17 C 7021 (N.D. Ill.
2017) (dismissed with prejudice); see also Ayot v.
Ushmann et al., 17 C 7668 (case pending); see also
Ayot, 17 C 8266 (N.D. Ill. Nov. 15, 2017); see also
Ayot, 17 C 8267 (N.D. Ill. Nov. 15, 2017).
on October 27, 2016, Ayot filed a pro se suit in
front of Judge Feinerman, now framing the Naperville
police's conduct as violating Ayot's civil rights.
See Ayot v. City of Naperville, 16 C 10083 (N.D.
Ill. 2016). After filing his case, Ayot “papered the
docket with a dizzying array of baseless and/or procedurally
improper motions[, ]” the vast majority were frivolous
and therefore denied. (Id. at Dkt. 129 at 1.) Judge
Feinerman granted the defendants' motion to dismiss,
noting that Ayot's federal claim mirrored the pleadings
in his state court cases. (Id. at Dkt. 128.) On the
same day Ayot filed his case in front of Judge Feinerman, on
October 27, 2016, he also filed a pro se complaint
in a case assigned to Judge Ellis for claims also stemming
from the October 2015 domestic violence charges. Ayot v.
Dupage SAO, 16 C 10086 (N.D. Ill. 2016). Because
prosecutors within the State's Attorney's Office
enjoy absolute immunity, see, e.g., Van de Kamp v.
Goldstein, 555 U.S. 335, 342 (2009), the court dismissed
the action. (Id. at Dkt. 13.)
12, 2017, Ayot filed yet another federal case, which was
assigned to Judge Tharp. Ayot v. DuPage County, 17 C
4401 (N.D. Ill. 2017). Ayot alleged that DuPage County was
committing libel against him by disclosing charges against
him that had been dismissed on the website
“vinelink.” Id. at Dkt. 1. Judge Tharp
tried to organize the “jumbled narrative” but
determined it did not give rise to a plausible federal claim:
(1) despite suing DuPage County, there were no facts relating
to Monell (see generally Monell v. Dep't. of
Social Services, 436 U.S. 658 (1978)) and (2) there was
no connection between the defendant entities and the
“vinelink” website that allegedly failed to take
down Ayot's name. (Dkt. 30 at 3.)
September 28, 2017, Ayot filed his next pro se
complaint along with an application for leave to proceed
in forma pauperis; this case was assigned to Judge
Blakey. Ayot v. Naperville Police, 17 C 7021 (N.D.
Ill. 2017). In reviewing the application, Judge Blakey
dismissed the case because the lawsuit was repetitive and
barred by res judicata principles. Id. at Dkt. 21.
Judge Blakey specifically noted that on the civil cover
sheet, Ayot was asked to list any related cases and to
indicate whether he was initiating an original proceeding or
a reinstated or reopened case and that Ayot checked the box
for “original proceeding” and did not list any
related case. Id. Judge Blakey determined that this
statement was false based on Ayot's history of pursuing
the claim both in federal and state court and the case was
closed on November 6, 2017. (Id.) Litigants who lie
on their IFP applications have routinely been dismissed from
litigating their claims before courts due to their abuse of
the legal process. See Thomas v. General Motors
Acceptance Corp., 288 F.3d 305, 306 (7th Cir. 2002)
(Dismissal with prejudice is an appropriate sanction when a
plaintiff tries to deceive the district court by falsifying
an IFP application.) (collecting cases).
October 24, 2017, Ayot filed Ayot v. Ushmann et al.,
17 C 7668 and the case was assigned to Judge Durkin. Once
again, the case charges DuPage entities and various
individual government employees for, among other things,
malicious libel for keeping his name on the
“vinelink” website after charges had been
dropped. (Id.) The case is currently pending,
although it appears to be a mere rehash of the case filed
before Judge Tharp.
instant case, on October 30, 2017, Ayot fashions his
complaint as charging “RICO Violations” against
the DuPage State's Attorney Office, the DuPage probation
department, and five individual defendants employed by
DuPage. (Dkt. 1.) In his civil cover sheet, he does not list
any related cases and instead leaves that portion of the
sheet blank. (Dkt. 3.) The Complaint is another attempt to
litigate the events that stemmed from the initial October
2015 domestic violence incident. Ayot alleges that around
that time, Officer Nance of the Naperville police “used
false claims” to request a warrant resulting in
Ayot's being taken into custody in case 15 DV 1582. (Dkt.
1 at ¶ 1.)
Complaint ends with a few conclusory allegations, including:
“Let the court be aware that after extorting bond money
from me, Dupage sao then engaged in further Rico [sic]
violations by engaging in falsified testimony, illegal
imprisonment, harassment, intimidation and retaliation all in
an attempt to refuse to comply with legal court orders
requiring Dupage sao and clerk of court to refund 100% of
bond after charges against me were dismissed.” (Dkt. 1
at ¶ 11.) He asks for damages of $25, 000, 000.
same day he filed his case, Ayot also filed a request for a
restraining order requesting an order against Dupage SAO for
“abuse of office by needlessly bringing litigation
against me whenever courts ruled against them.” (Dkt.
8.) He also ...