Skip to content.
About GPO   |   Newsroom/Media   |   Congressional Relations   |   Inspector General   |   Careers   |   Contact   |   askGPO   |   Help  
 

  FDsys > More Information
(Search string is required)
 

16-3029 - TILLISON v. SHELBY COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE CENTER


Download Files

Metadata

Document in Context
16-3029 - TILLISON v. SHELBY COUNTY CRIMINAL JUSTICE CENTER
January 3, 2017
PDF | More
Entry Discussing Amended Complaint and Directing Service of Process - In the Entry of November 9, 2016, the Court screened the plaintiff's complaint and dismissed it for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted because the only named defendant was the Shelby County Jail, which is not a suable entity. The plaintiff was given an opportunity to file an amended complaint, which he has done. Any claim based on 210 IAC 3-1-11 is therefore dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. As noted above, the named defendant is the Shelby County Sheriff's Department. The plaintiff alleges that the "Sheriff is in charge of the Jail." The Court broadly construes the amended complaint as alleging that the Sheriff and/or a policy of the Jail interfered with the plaintiff's prescribed treatment and the plaintiff was thereby deliberately denied or delayed necessary medical treatment in violation of the Eighth Amendment. This claim shall proceed. Because naming both the Shelby County Sheriff in his official capacity and the Shelby County Sheriff's Department is redundant, the sole defendant for the present is the Shelby County Sheriff in his individual and official capacities. The clerk is designated pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c) to issue process to the Shelby County Sheriff in the manner specified by Rule 4(d). Process shall consist of the amended complaint filed on December 5, 2016 (docket 10), applicable forms (Notice of Lawsuit and Request for Waiver of Service of Summons and Waiver of Service of Summons), and this Entry. The plaintiff shall report any change of address within seven (7) days. The clerk shall update the docket to reflect the defendant as the Shelby County Sheriff in his individual and official capacities. (See Entry.) Copies to parties per the distribution list. Signed by Judge William T. Lawrence on 1/3/2017.(BRR)
December 21, 2017
PDF | More
ORDER denying Plaintiff's 39 Motion for Reconsideration and Reopen Case. The defendant first sought dismissal of this case for failure to prosecute on June 13, 2017. For the next four months, the Court gave the plaintiff several opportunities to comply with the Pretrial Schedule or explain why he could not. Although the plaintiff clearly received these orders and communicated with the Court, he did not comply with the Court's orders or heed the warning that his case was subject to dismissal. The plaintiff's Rule 60(b) motion is insufficient to establish that, nearly two months after Final Judgment was entered, the plaintiff's circumstances were exceptional such that Rule 60(b) relief is warranted. (Copy to Plaintiff via U.S. Mail) Signed by Judge William T. Lawrence on 12/21/2017. (JDC)