Griffin

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

MATTHEW JAMES GRIFFIN, #Y53580, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

vs. ) Case No. 25-cv-01367-SMY

)

DEEDEE BROOKHART, )

JEREMIAH BROWN, LT. SAWYER, )

SGT. STEELE, MAJOR HENTON, )

C/O MARTIN, C/O MUSGRAVES, )

C/O SUMMERS, SGT. PIPER, )

SGT. JOHNSON, LT. YOUNG, )

SGT. HAYDEN, PERCY MYER, )

SGT. JOHN DOE 1, SGT. JOHN DOE 2, )

C/O JOHN DOE 3, C/O JOHN DOE 4, )

LT. JOHN DOE 5, and JOHN DOES 6-27, )

)

Defendants. )

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

YANDLE, Chief District Judge:

Plaintiff Matthew James Griffin, an inmate of the Illinois Department of Corrections

(IDOC), filed a Complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for alleged constitutional deprivations

stemming from his inadequate shelter at Lawrence Correctional Center. (Doc. 1). The Complaint

is subject to preliminary review under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, which requires screening of prisoner

complaints and dismissal of portions that are legally frivolous or malicious, fail to state a claim,

or seek money damages from an immune defendant.

The Complaint

Plaintiff makes the following allegations in the Complaint (Doc. 1, pp. 1-30): Plaintiff

transferred into the custody of IDOC pursuant to an interstate corrections compact with the New

Mexico prison system in August 2022. He arrived at Lawrence on September 16, 2022. Id. at 6.

Because he qualifies for accommodations under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA),1

Plaintiff was placed in an ADA cell (R8-CL-22) in administrative detention and has remained there

ever since. Id. at 7.

Defendants denied Plaintiff adequate shelter from the cold after the south end boiler

malfunctioned and failed to supply hot water to the radiant heaters that serve half of the housing

units at Lawrence from October 28, 2022 through March 19, 2023. Id. The temperature in his

housing unit began to fall below 50 degrees by October 28, 2022, below 40 degrees by mid-

November 2022, and below 32 degrees by December 2022. Id. at 12.

It snowed on December 22, 2022, and the snow accumulated on the floor of the lower deck

of C Wing in Building 8. Id. at 13. The next morning, the temperature fell to -4 degrees outside,

and a thermal gun recorded a temperature of 30 degrees in C Wing. “They” worked on the sky

vent but said nothing could be done about the heat. Id. The early morning temperature was 27

degrees on March 18, 2023, 23 degrees on March 19, 2023, and 25 degrees on March 20, 2023.

Id. at 18. The heat was restored to Plaintiff’s cell on the afternoon of March 20, 2023. Id.

On the following dates, Plaintiff told prison officials that “cold air was flowing into the

cells and the heat was not on:” Brookhart, Brown, and Jennings2 (October 28, 2022); Musgraves,

Henton, Doe #1, Doe #2, Doe #3, and Doe #4 (between October 29 and December 19, 2022); Doe

#5 (November 23, 2022); Brookhart (December 20, 2022); Doe #7, Doe #8, and Doe #9 (December

23, 2022); Sawyer and Steele (December 29, 2022). They took no corrective action. Id. at 13-19.

Beginning in 2023, Plaintiff learned the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals required inmates

to have access to hot water in their cells, and he began informing staff of this as well. On the

1 Plaintiff qualifies for accommodations due to bilateral shoulder dysfunction, vision impairment, and a serious heart

condition caused by premature ventricular contraction. Id. at 6-7.

2 Because Plaintiff does not name “Jennings” as a defendant, all claims against this individual are considered dismissed

from this action without prejudice.

following dates, Plaintiff reported cold air, no heat, and no hot water: Doe #10 (January 10, 2023);

Martin (January 22, 2023); Jennings and Henton (January 23-24, 2023); Musgraves (January 24,

2023); Piper, Summers, and Doe #13 (January 25, 2023); Johnson (January 27, 2023); Doe #14

and Doe #23 (February 3, 2023); Doe #15 and Doe #24 (February 7, 2023); Brookhart, Brown,

and Jennings (February 9, 2023); Young and Hayden (February 10, 2023); Myer, Doe #17, and

Doe #25 (February 11, 2023); Brookhart (February 25, 2023); Doe #18 and Doe #26 (March 3,

2023); Summers and Doe #19 (March 6, 2023); Doe #20 and Doe #27 (March 9, 2023); Doe #21

and #22 (March 17, 2023). They took no corrective action. Id. at 13-19.

Plaintiff received specialized training in hyperthermia and induced hyperthermia while

serving in the military. Id. at 10-11. At various times between October 2022 and March 2023, he

suffered symptoms of hyperthermia, and he reported these symptoms to staff. Id. at 19 (listing

symptoms). He also believes that heated cells were available in other areas of the prison, but no

one moved him. Id. at 18.

Plaintiff filed grievances to complain about the lack of heat and hot water and exhausted

his administrative remedies before filing suit. The first grievance appeal received a first-level

response that stated the following on July 12, 2023: “Based on a review of all available

information, this office has determined your grievance to be: other. Facility confirmed the south

end boiler malfunctioned. Facility staff confirm it was fixed on 2/21/2023. Mixed.” Id.

Based on these allegations, the Court designates the following claim3 in the pro se

Complaint:

Count 1: Eighth Amendment claim against Defendants for subjecting Plaintiff to cold

conditions, no heat, and no hot water in Cell R8-CL-22 from October 28,

2022 through March 19, 2023.

3 The Court has combined Counts 1 and 2 in Plaintiff’s Complaint because both address a combination of conditions

involving inadequate shelter that resulted in his alleged injury with hypothermia in violation of the Eighth Amendment.

Any other claim mentioned in the Complaint but not addressed herein is considered dismissed

without prejudice under Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007) (action fails to

state a claim if it does not plead “enough facts to state a claim that is plausible on its face.”).

Discussion

The Eighth Amendment prohibits cruel and unusual punishment of convicted persons. U.S.

CONST. amend VIII. These protections extend to conditions of confinement that pose a substantial

risk of serious harm to an inmate’s health or safety. Estate of Miller, ex rel. Bertram v. Tobiasz,

680 F.3d 984 (7th Cir. 2012). In order to state a colorable Eighth Amendment claim based on

unconstitutional living conditions, a plaintiff must plead facts suggesting he suffered a serious

deprivation and that each defendant acted with deliberate indifference to his conditions of

confinement. Sain v. Wood, 512 F.3d 886, 894 (7th Cir. 2008); Helling v. McKinney, 509 U.S. 25,

35 (1993).

Section 1983 creates a cause of action based on personal liability and predicated upon fault.

Thus, a plaintiff may not attribute his constitutional claims to high-ranking officials by relying on

respondeat superior because this doctrine is not recognized under § 1983. Each defendant must

have participated in the constitutional wrongdoing. Pepper v. Village of Oak Park, 430 F.3d 809,

810 (7th Cir. 2005) (citations omitted).

Here, Plaintiff names forty defendants that he told “cold air was flowing into the cells and

the heat was not on” (October 28, 2022 - December 31, 2022) or that his cell had cold air, no heat,

and no hot water (January 1, 2023 – March 19, 2023). He describes one or two interactions with

most defendants, and provides insufficient details about each individual’s response to his

complaints or his injuries during each encounter.

Plaintiff identifies five defendants who allegedly received his complaints about his

inadequate shelter and his symptoms of hyperthermia during the relevant timeframe: Brookhart,

Brown, Musgraves, Henton, and Summers. As such, Count 1 will proceed against these

individuals. Plaintiff’s claim will be dismissed without prejudice for failure to state a claim against

all others.

Disposition

The Complaint (Doc. 1) survives screening under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, and COUNT 1 will

proceed against Defendants BROOKHART, BROWN, MUSGRAVES, HENTON, and

SUMMERS, in their individual capacities. However, COUNT 1 is DISMISSED without

prejudice against all other defendants for failure to state a claim.

Because Plaintiff seeks injunctive relief, the WARDEN OF LAWRENCE

CORRECTIONAL CENTER (currently Jeremiah Brown) is ADDED in an official capacity to

implement any injunctive relief ordered herein.

The Clerk shall prepare for Defendants DEEDEE BROOKHART, C/O MUSGRAVES,

MAJOR HENTON, SERGEANT SUMMERS, and JEREMIAH BROWN (individual and

official capacity): (1) Form 5 (Notice of a Lawsuit and Request to Waive Service of a Summons),

and (2) Form 6 (Waiver of Service of Summons). The Clerk is DIRECTED to mail these forms,

a copy of the Complaint, and this Memorandum and Order to each Defendant’s place of

employment as identified by Plaintiff. If a Defendant fails to sign and return the Waiver of Service

of Summons (Form 6) to the Clerk within 30 days from the date the forms were sent, the Clerk

shall take appropriate steps to effect formal service on the Defendant, and the Court will require

the Defendant to pay the full costs of formal service, to the extent authorized by the Federal Rules

of Civil Procedure.

If a Defendant cannot be found at the work address provided by Plaintiff, the employer

shall furnish the Clerk with the Defendant’s current work address, or, if not known, the

Defendant’s last-known address. This information shall be used only for sending the forms as

directed above or for formally effecting service. Any documentation of the address shall be

retained only by the Clerk and shall not be maintained in the court file or disclosed by the Clerk.

Defendants are ORDERED to timely file an appropriate responsive pleading to the

Complaint and shall not waive filing a reply pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(g). Pursuant to Local

Rule 8.2, Defendants need only respond to the issues stated in this Merit Review Order.

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, even though he was granted in forma pauperis status. 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 and the opposing parties 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 14 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).

The Clerk’s Office is DIRECTED to ADD the Current Warden of Lawrence

Correctional Center (official capacity) as a defendant and TERMINATE all defendants other

than Brookhart, Brown, Musgraves, Henton, and Summers.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: April 23, 2026 s/ Staci M. Yandle_____

STACI M. YANDLE

Chief U.S. District Judge

Notice to Plaintiff

The Court will take the necessary steps to notify the Defendants of your lawsuit and serve

them with a copy of your Complaint. After service has been achieved, Defendants will enter an

appearance and file an Answer to your Complaint. It will likely take at least 60 days from the date

of this Order to receive the Defendants’ Answer, but it is entirely possible that it will take 90 days

or more. When Defendants have filed their Answers, the Court will enter a Scheduling Order

containing important information on deadlines, discovery, and procedures. Plaintiff is advised to

wait until counsel has appeared for Defendants before filing any motions, to give the Defendants

notice and an opportunity to respond to those motions. Motions filed before Defendants’ counsel

has filed an appearance will generally be denied as premature. Plaintiff need not submit any

evidence to the Court at this time, unless specifically directed to do so.