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.

Mason v. Spiller

United States District Court, S.D. Illinois

May 4, 2018

MICKEY DEANGELO MASON, #R04326, Plaintiff,
v.
WILLIAM A. SPILLER, ORANGE CRUSH, and JACQUELINE LASHBROOK, Defendants.

          MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

          Herndon United States District Judge

         This matter is now before the Court for review of a Motion for Reconsideration (doc. 16) and a Motion to Supplement Reconsideration (doc. 19) filed by Plaintiff Mickey Mason. In both motions, Plaintiff challenges the Court's decision to dismiss all but one claim on September 21, 2017 (doc. 9). For the reasons set forth herein, both motions (docs. 16, 19) are DENIED.

         Background

         Plaintiff originally filed this action on August 15, 2017 (doc. 1). Before the Court screened the Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint (doc. 6) on August 25, 2017. In it, he asserted various claims for deprivations of his constitutional rights against officials at Menard Correctional Center (“Menard”). The Court screened the Amended Complaint on September 21, 2017, and identified the following claims:

Count 1 - Claim against Defendants Wood, Smolek, and Butler, based on Plaintiff's warning that the defendants would be liable for anything that occurred in the odd-numbered galleries of Menard's East Cell House on February 3, 2016.
Count 2 - Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference claim against the Orange Crush Officers and Spiller for using excessive force against Plaintiff on April 1, 2016.
Count 3 - Fourteenth Amendment due process claim against Defendants Wood, Pierce, Rowold, and Butler for failing to respond to Plaintiff's grievances in 2016-17.
Count 4 - First and/or Fourteenth Amendment denial of access to courts claim against the Mailroom Staff and Internal Affairs for regularly interfering with Plaintiff's personal and legal mail in 2016-17.
Count 5 - First and/or Fourteenth Amendment denial of access to courts claim against the Orange Crush Officers who searched Plaintiff's cell and confiscated his personal property, including his legal mail, documents, and materials, on August 3, 2017.
Count 6 - Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference claim against unnamed defendants who transferred Plaintiff into a one-man cell with a cellmate on August 10, 2017.
Count 7 - Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference to medical needs claim against unnamed defendants who have denied Plaintiff access to medical treatment since April 1, 2016.
Count 8 - Claim against Defendants for conspiring to retaliate against Plaintiff for exercising his constitutional rights.

(Doc. 6; Doc. 9, p. 7). The Court dismissed Counts 1, 3, 6, 7, and 8 for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted (doc. 9, p. 13). The Court also determined that the remaining claims (Counts 2, 4, and 5) were improperly joined in the same action (doc. 9, pp. 10-12). Therefore, pursuant to Rules 18, 20, and 21 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and George v. Smith, 507 F.3d 605 (7th Cir. 2007), the Court severed Counts 4 and 5 into two new cases (doc. 9, pp. 10-13). Count 2 remained in this action and survived preliminary review under § 1915A (doc. 9, p. 15; Doc. 10).

         Motions ...


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.