United States District Court, S.D. Illinois
ROBERTA NICKIE EZELL QUILLMAN, also known as ROBERT N. QUILLMAN NO. B85887, Plaintiff,
IDOC, NICHOLAS LAMB, MICHAE B. GILREATH, and C/O RUTHERFORD, Defendants.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
J. ROSENSTENGEL UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Roberta Nickie Ezell Quillman (a/k/a Robert N. Quillman), a
transgender inmate of the Illinois Department of Corrections
(“IDOC”) currently incarcerated at Pontiac
Correctional Center (“Pontiac”), brings this
action for deprivations of her constitutional rights pursuant
to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (Doc. 1). Plaintiffs original
Complaint (Doc. 1), which was filed when Plaintiff was housed
at Lawrence Correctional Center (“Lawrence”),
alleged as follows:
• Plaintiff is a transgender inmate who identifies as
female and suffers from gender identity disorder.
• Unspecified officials at Lawrence were denying
Plaintiffs emergency requests for protective custody.
• Plaintiff was being subjected to “public
humiliation, discrimination, bullying, [and] physical and
• Plaintiff had been raped, sexually assaulted, and
beaten by male inmates and by staff at Lawrence.
• Plaintiff had attempted suicide.
(Doc. 1, p. 5). In connection with these claims, Plaintiff
sought monetary damages and injunctive relief. Specifically,
Plaintiff asked to be placed in protective custody at Pontiac
or Stateville Correctional Center. As noted above, after
filing the original Complaint, Plaintiff was transferred to
Pontiac and is presently incarcerated at that institution.
original Complaint did not associate Plaintiff's claims
with any particular individual; instead, she generally
alleged she had been assaulted by “Lawrence
Correctional Staff.” Unfortunately, however, Plaintiff
did not identify any particular staff member or describe how
any particular staff member was personally involved in
violating her constitutional rights. Accordingly, the
original Complaint was dismissed without prejudice and with
leave to amend. The IDOC, however, was dismissed with
prejudice as an improper defendant. In dismissing the
original Complaint, the Court explained as
If Plaintiff wants to pursue her claims, she must file an
amended complaint. If known, the amended complaint should
identify who violated Plaintiff's constitutional rights
by name and should include a description of how
Plaintiff's rights were violated. If Plaintiff does not
know the names of these individuals, she can refer to them by
Doe designation (e.g., John Doe 1 (correctional officer
working the noon shift). Additionally, any individual
Plaintiff intends to sue should be identified as a defendant
in the case caption and should be referenced in the body of
the amended complaint.
(Doc. 5, p. 4).
case is now before the Court for a preliminary review of the
Amended Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, which
(a) Screening - The court shall review,
before docketing, if feasible or, in any event, as soon as
practicable after docketing, a complaint in a civil action in
which a prisoner seeks redress from a governmental entity or
officer or employee of a governmental entity.
(b) Grounds for Dismissal - On review, the
court shall identify cognizable claims or dismiss the
complaint, or any portion of ...