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.

Jones v. Mooney

United States District Court, S.D. Illinois

March 21, 2018

CORBIN D. JONES, Plaintiff,
v.
NEIL MOONEY, and CITY OF MT. VERNON, ILLINOIS Defendants.

          MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

          J. PHIL GILBERT UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         Plaintiff, a former detainee at the Jefferson County Justice Center, brings this pro se civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff requests monetary damages. At the time of filing, Plaintiff was not incarcerated, meaning that he was not a “prisoner” under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. However, he has filed a motion seeking leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and so the Court will screen this case pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B), which provides:

Notwithstanding any filing fee, or any portion thereof, that may have been paid, the court shall dismiss the case at any time if the court determines that ... the action or appeal-
i. is frivolous or malicious;
ii. fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted; or
iii. seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief.

         An action or claim is frivolous if “it lacks an arguable basis either in law or in fact.” Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989). Frivolousness is an objective standard that refers to a claim that any reasonable person would find meritless. Lee v. Clinton, 209 F.3d 1025, 1026- 27 (7th Cir. 2000). An action fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted if it does not plead “enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.” Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007). The claim of entitlement to relief must cross “the line between possibility and plausibility.” Id. at 557. At this juncture, the factual allegations of the pro se complaint are to be liberally construed. See Rodriguez v. Plymouth Ambulance Serv., 577 F.3d 816, 821 (7th Cir. 2009).

         The Complaint

         Plaintiff claims that he was “falsely imprisoned for six months.” (Doc. 1, p. 2). The Complaint identifies two defendants: (1) Neil Mooney, described as the arresting police officer and (2) the City of Mt. Vernon. (Doc. 1, pp. 1-2). The statement of claim consists of a single page that includes several confusing statements. (Doc. 1, p. 6). The statements are not associated with any particular individual, let alone the named Defendants. (Doc. 1, p. 6). The Court specifically notes the following:

• “Violated Rule 1.16 of the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct.”
• “[They] had all the evidence in front of them to know the case was wrongful but they decided to push forward.”
• “Also liable, slander, defamation of character, abuse of process, sovereign immunity, violation of the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct.”
• “The Federal Tort Claims Act allows an individual to sue the federal government…”

(Doc. 1, p. 6).

         The Complaint was filed with 55 pages of exhibits. (Doc. 1-1). However, only a single page relates to the instant case. (Doc. 1-1, p. 1). The other 54 pages are filings related to other civil rights actions Plaintiff is pursuing or previously pursued in this Court. (Doc. 1-1, pp. 2-55). The page that appears to be relevant to the instant case includes the following additional information:

• Plaintiff was arrested or falsely imprisoned on ...

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.