a successful complaint generally alleges “the who, what, when, where, and how ....”
How later courts described this case
- a successful complaint generally alleges “the who, what, when, where, and how ....”
- “[I]ndividual liability under § 1983 requires personal involvement in the alleged constitutional deprivation”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
JASON RYAN PATE, #Y38444, )
et al., )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
vs. ) Case No. 3:22-cv-00838-SMY
)
SHAWNEE CC, )
IDOC WARDEN, )
PAROLE BOARD, )
AC, and )
CAO, )
)
Defendants. )
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
YANDLE, District Judge:
Plaintiff Jason Ryan Pate, an inmate of the Illinois Department of Corrections, filed the
instant lawsuit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for alleged deprivations of his constitutional rights at
Shawnee Correctional Center.1 This case is now before the Court for preliminary review of the
Complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Any portion of the Complaint that is legally frivolous,
malicious, fails to state a claim for relief, or requests money damages from an immune defendant
must be dismissed. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b).
Complaint
Plaintiff makes the following allegations in the Complaint (Doc. 1): Because the “COs and
Lts are supper thirsty and lazy,” Plaintiff has been beaten, raped, threatened, and his personal
property has been stolen. He wants his GED workbook, AA book, address book, bible, and reading
1 The form complaint Plaintiff used to set forth his claim gives the prisoner-plaintiff the option to label the action as
arising under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (for state prisoners); 28 U.S.C. § 1331 (federal prisoners); or the Federal Tort Claims
Act (“FTCA”), 28 U.S.C. §§ 1346 and 2671-2680. Plaintiff selected all three.
glasses returned or replaced. He seeks monetary damages, 90 days good time, a transfer to Elgin
Treatment Center, and release from confinement.
Discussion
As an initial matter, Shawnee Correctional Center and the Parole Board are state
government agencies not subject to suit for money damages under § 1983. Therefore, they will be
dismissed. Thomas v. Illinois, 697 F.3d 612, 613 (7th Cir. 2012).
In addition to Pate, the Complaint lists as party plaintiffs the Pate Family, Cross, Howard
Abigton, Creig, Jashon Barns Duities, Macaffs, and Mongumeries. However, the Complaint does
not identify these individuals or state their standing to bring a claim. Nor did they sign the
Complaint as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11(a): “[e]very pleading, written motion,
and other paper must be signed . . . by a party personally if the party is unrepresented.” And based
on the sparse allegations in the Complaint, it is unclear how anyone other than Pate could be a
proper Plaintiff. For these reasons, the Pate Family, Cross, Howard Abigton, Creig, Jashon Barns
Duities, Macaffs, and Mongumeries will be dismissed.
To survive preliminary review under § 1915A, a Complaint must contain “a short and plain
statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief,” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2), which
includes “enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.” Bell Atlantic Corp. v.
Twombly , 550 U.S. 544, 547 (2007). A plaintiff must also associate specific defendants with
specific claims, so that defendants are put on notice of the claims brought against them and they
can properly answer the Complaint. Id. at 555. And, because Plaintiff brings his claims under
§1983, he must allege that each defendant was personally involved in the deprivation of a
constitutional right. Matz v. Klotka, 769 F.3d 517, 528 (7th Cir. 2014) (“[I]ndividual liability
under § 1983 requires personal involvement in the alleged constitutional deprivation”) (internal
citations and quotation marks omitted).
Because Plaintiff fails to allege specific acts of wrongdoing by the individual defendants
and facts suggesting personal involvement as required for § 1983 liability, he fails to state a viable
claim. Accordingly, the Complaint will be dismissed. Plaintiff will be given an opportunity to re-
plead his claims.
Disposition
Shawnee Correctional Center and the Parole Board are DISMISSED with prejudice and
the Pate Family, Cross, Howard Abigton, Creig, Jashon Barns Duities, Macaffs, and Mongumeries
are DISMISSED without prejudice. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to TERMINATE these
parties.
The Complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to state a claim for relief.
Plaintiff is GRANTED leave to file a First Amended Complaint by June 6, 2022. The First
Amended Complaint will be subject to review under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A.
Should Plaintiff file a First Amended Complaint, it is strongly recommended that he use
the civil rights complaint form designed for use in this District. He should label the form “First
Amended Complaint” and use the case number for this action (No. 22-838). Further, Plaintiff
should identify each defendant in the case caption and include sufficient allegations against each
defendant to describe what the defendant did or failed to do to violate his constitutional rights, see
DiLeo v. Ernst & Young, 901 F.2d 624, 627 (7th Cir. 1990) (a successful complaint generally
alleges “the who, what, when, where, and how ....”), and as much as possible, include the relevant
facts in chronological order, inserting each defendant’s name where necessary to identify the actors
and each defendant’s actions. While Plaintiff may use “John Doe” or “Jane Doe” to refer to parties
whose names are unknown, he must still follow pleading standards and include a short, plain
statement of the case against that party. He must describe each Doe Defendant and their
involvement in the alleged unconstitutional conduct (for example, John Doe did X and Jane Doe
did Y). To facilitate Plaintiff’s compliance with this Order, the Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to
mail Plaintiff a civil rights complaint form.
An amended complaint supersedes and replaces the original complaint, rendering the
original complaint void. See Flannery v. Recording Indus. Ass’n of Am., 354 F.3d 632, 638 n. 1
(7th Cir. 2004). Therefore, the Court will not accept piecemeal amendments to a previously filed
Complaint. Instead, the First Amended Complaint must stand on its own, without reference to any
previous pleading. Plaintiff should attach any exhibits that he wishes to submit with the First
Amended Complaint.
If Plaintiff fails to file his First Amended Complaint within the allotted time or consistent
with the instructions set forth in this Order, the case will be dismissed with prejudice for failure to
state a claim for relief, failure to comply with a court order, and for failure to prosecute his claims.
See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Ladien v. Astrachan, 128 F.3d 1051 (7th Cir. 1997); Johnson v.
Kamminga, 34 F.3d 466 (7th Cir. 1994); 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). The dismissal will count as a
“strike” under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).
Plaintiff is ADVISED that if judgment is rendered against him and the judgment includes
the payment of costs under 28 U.S.C. §1915, he will be required to pay the full amount of the
costs. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(f)(2)(A).
Plaintiff is further ADVISED that he is under a continuing obligation to keep the Clerk of
Court informed of any change in his address; the Court will not independently investigate his
whereabouts. This shall be done in writing and not later than 7 days after a transfer or other change
in address occurs. Failure to comply with this order will cause a delay in the transmission of court
documents and may result in dismissal of this action for want of prosecution. See Fed. R. Civ. P.
41(b).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: May 6, 2022
s/ Staci M. Yandle_____
STACI M. YANDLE
United States District Judge