United States District Court, S.D. Illinois
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
J. Rosenstengel Chief U.S. District Judge.
Julio Chavez, an inmate of the Illinois Department of
Corrections (“IDOC”), who is currently
incarcerated at Lawrence Correctional Center
(“Lawrence”), brings this civil rights action
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff claims that he
was attacked by another inmate resulting in extensive head
injuries, including a broken nose. Because his broken nose
has gone untreated, Plaintiff has developed several physical
and mental health problems such as a mild brain injury, loss
of hearing in his left ear, extreme pain behind his eyes,
migraines, difficulty sleeping and breathing, dizziness,
double vision, depression, memory loss, and anxiety.
an initial screening of the Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915A, Plaintiff was allowed to proceed on the
1: Eighth Amendment claim against Cunningham for deliberate
indifference to medical needs.
to the Initial Scheduling and Discovery Order, Plaintiff had
until September 19, 2019, to file a motion for leave to amend
the complaint to include any additional claims or parties.
(Doc. 25, p. 3). On July 18, 2019, he filed a Motion for
Leave to File an Amended Complaint (Doc. 29). The Court
denied the motion as attempting to add to his original
complaint by interlineation. (Doc. 30). Plaintiff again filed
another Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint on August
8, 2019, in which he brings claims against two additional
Defendants: Sarah Stover and Dr. Ritz (Doc. 32). Defendants
filed a Response to the motion arguing that the motion should
be denied for failing to conform to Local Rule 15.1. They
assert that the proposed Amended Complaint underlines only
the names of the new proposed defendants, but fails to
underline all added allegations. (Doc. 33, p. 2).
Court now considers Plaintiff's Motion for Service of
Process at Government Expense (Doc. 31) and his Motion for
Leave to File an Amended Complaint (Doc. 32).
Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a) provides that leave to amend
should be freely given when justice so requires.
Plaintiff's motion is timely and, while the Court
acknowledges that Plaintiff's proposed amendment does not
underline all the new material as required by Local Rule
15.1, the Court will waive this requirement in this instance.
Nonetheless, the First Amended Complaint is still subject to
review under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Accordingly, prior to
granting leave to amend, the Court will screen the First
Amended Complaint in accordance with this statute.
First Amended Complaint, Plaintiff brings identical claims
against Defendant Cunningham. He also adds claims of
deliberate indifference regarding the treatment of his broken
nose against Nurse Sarah Stover and Dr. Ritz. Plaintiff
claims that Sarah Stover refused to put his nose back into
place because he incurred the injury while fighting, leaving
him in constant pain. He also alleges that Dr. Ritz denied
his referral to see an Ear, Nose, and Throat Specialist and
stated that Plaintiff's problem was a cosmetic issue that
can be fixed when he is released.
the Court designates a new Count 1 as follows:
1: Eighth Amendment claim against Cunningham, Stover, and
Ritz for deliberate indifference to medical needs.
reasons articulated in the original Merit Review Order (Doc.
3), Plaintiff's claims against Defendant Cunningham
survive preliminary review. Plaintiff's allegations as to
Nurse Sarah Stover and Dr. Ritz regarding the inadequate
treatment of his injuries are also sufficient to state an
Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference claim. Accordingly,
the new Count 1 as designated in this Order shall proceed.
for Service of Process at Government Expense
Plaintiff has been granted pauper status (Doc. 16) and the
Court is obligated to arrange service for incarcerated
persons proceeding in forma pauperis, his Motion for
Service of ...