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.

Hoskins v. Eovaldi

United States District Court, S.D. Illinois

August 19, 2019

JOSHUA LEE HOSKINS, Plaintiff,
v.
FRANK EOVALDI, et al., Defendants.

          ORDER

          Hon. Reona J. Daly United States Magistrate Judge.

         Plaintiff Joshua Lee Hoskins, an inmate in the custody of the Illinois Department of Corrections (“IDOC”), filed this lawsuit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging his constitutional rights were violated while he was incarcerated at Menard Correctional Center (“Menard”).

         Hoskins alleges he was subjected to excessive force, retaliation, unconstitutional confinement in a filthy cell, and deliberate indifference to his medical needs. Hoskins is currently proceeding on the following claims:

Count One: Eighth Amendment excessive force claim against Eovaldi for twisting and bending Hoskins' hands and fingers on November 30, 2016.
Count Two: Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference claim against all Defendants for placing and/or holding Hoskins in an unsanitary cell contaminated with human waste, and/or refusing to relocate him or remedy the unhealthy conditions between November 30, 2016 and January 4, 2017.
Count Three: First Amendment claim against Eovaldi, Sanders, Young, Lt. Engelage, Officer Engelage, Hudson, Jetton, Carter, Witthoft, Officer Spiller, Swisher, Hof, Laminack, Bump, Mercer, Snell, Mennerich, Marshall, Rena Engelage, Hartman, Roth, Lang, Gardiner, Myers, Brookman, Held, Slavens, McCarthy, Wooley, Sanders, William Spiller, Gee, Phelps, Gutreuter, and Allen for placing and/or holding Hoskins in an unsanitary cell to retaliate against him for his litigation and/or grievance activity against Menard officers.
Count Four: Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference claim against health care providers Marshall, Rena Engelage, and Lang for refusing to provide Hoskins with medical attention for the skin irritation, nausea, and other conditions he developed while housed in the unsanitary and contaminated cell.

         This matter is now before the Court on the following motions filed by Plaintiff:

• Motion for an Order Compelling Discovery (Proper Interrogatory Responses) against the Defendants (Doc. 76);
• Motion for an Order Compelling Discovery (Proper Discovery Document Responses) against the Defendants (Doc. 77);
• Second Motion to Compel the Defendants to Provide Adequate Responses and Documents to the Plaintiff Discovery Request (Doc. 90);
• Combined Motions for Discovery (Doc. 92); and
• Motion for the Court to Issue an Order to Pinckneyville Correctional Center Health Care Unit (Doc. 98)

         1. Motions to Compel ...


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.