Order Form (01/2005)

United States District Court, Northern District of Illinois

Name of Assigned Judge

or Magistrate Judge John A. Nordberg Sitting Judge if Otherthan Assigned Judge

CASE NUMBER 12 C 3965 DATE 6/1/12

CASE

TITLE

Robert Goldsmith (#2011-0001700) vs. Correctional Officer Zolecki

DOCKET ENTRY TEXT:

Plaintiff’s motion for leave to file in forma pauperis [3] is granted. The trust officials at Plaintiff’s place of confinement

shall collect monthly payments from Plaintiff’s account as described below. The Clerk shall send a copy of this order to

the resident trust office at the Will County Adult Detention Facility to facilitate compliance. The Clerk shall issue summons

to Defendant Zolecki, and the U.S. Marshal is directed to serve him. If Plaintiff wishes to pursue a claim of deliberate

indifference to a serious medical condition, he must amend his complaint to name an appropriate Defendant. The Clerk is

further directed to send Plaintiff a Magistrate Judge Consent Form, Instructions for Submitting Documents, and a copy of

this order. Plaintiff’s motion for appointment of counsel [#4] is denied.

O [For further details see text below.] Docketing to mail notices.

STATEMENT

Plaintiff, pre-trial detainee in custody at the Will County Adult Detention Facility (hereinafter,

“WCADF”), has brought this pro se civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff claims that in June

of 2011, Defendant, Correctional Officer Zolecki subjected him to excessive force. More specifically, Plaintiff

alleges that Defendant Zolecki accused him of stealing and slammed him into a wall, resulting in a torn rotator

cuff. Plaintiff also seems to be alleging denial of medical care, but names not appropriate Defendant.

Plaintiff’s motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is granted. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1),

the plaintiff is assessed an initial partial filing fee of $40.63. The supervisor of inmate trust accounts at Plaintiff’s

place of confinement is authorized and ordered to collect, when funds exist, the partial filing fee from Plaintiff’s

trust fund account and pay it directly to the Clerk of Court. After payment of the initial partial filing fee, the trust

fund officer at Plaintiff’s place of confinement is directed to collect monthly payments from Plaintiff’s trust fund

account in an amount equal to 20% of the preceding month’s income credited to the account. Monthly payments

collected from Plaintiff’s trust fund account shall be forwarded to the Clerk of Court each time the amount in the

account exceeds $10 until the full $350 filing fee is paid. All payments shall be sent to the Clerk, United States

District Court, 219 S. Dearborn St., Chicago, Illinois 60604, attn: Cashier’s Desk, 20th Floor, and shall clearly

identify Plaintiff’s name and the case number assigned to this action. The WCADF inmate trust account office

shall notify transferee authorities of any outstanding balance in the event Plaintiff is transferred from the jail to

another correctional facility. 

Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, the Court is required to conduct a prompt threshold review of the complaint. 

Here, accepting Plaintiff’s allegations as true, the Court finds that Plaintiff has articulated a colorable federal

cause of action against Defendant Zolecki for excessive use of force. Acevedo v. Canterbury, 457 F.3d 721, 724

(7th Cir. 2006). 

(CONTINUED)

AWL

Page 1 of 2
STATEMENT (continued)

Additionally, while Plaintiff states a claim for deliberate indifference to a serious medical condition, see

Davis v. Carter, 453 F.3d 686, 696 (7th Cir. 2006); however, Plaintiff names no other Defendant than Defendant

Zolecki. If Plaintiff seeks to pursue a claim of deliberate indifference, he must amend his complaint to name a

Defendant who was personally involved in denying him medical care for a serious medical condition. Id. and see 

Pepper v. Village of Oak Park, 430 F.3d 809, 810 (7th Cir. 2005). 

 The Clerk shall issue summons to Defendant Zolecki, (hereinafter, “Defendant”) forthwith and send

Plaintiff a Magistrate Judge Consent Form and Instructions for Submitting Documents along with a copy of this

order.

The United States Marshals Service is appointed to serve Defendant. Any service forms necessary for

Plaintiff to complete will be sent by the Marshal as appropriate to serve Defendant with process. The U.S. Marshal

is directed to make all reasonable efforts to serve Defendant. If any Defendant can no longer can be found at the

work address provided by Plaintiff, the WCADF shall furnish the Marshal with his last-known address. The

information shall be used only for purposes of effectuating service [or for proof of service, should a dispute arise]

and any documentation of the address shall be retained only by the Marshal. Address information shall not be

maintained in the Court file, nor disclosed by the Marshal. The Marshal is authorized to mail a request for waiver

of service to Defendant in the manner prescribed by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(d)(2) before attempting personal service. 

Plaintiff is instructed to file all future papers concerning this action with the Clerk of Court in care of the

Prisoner Correspondent. Plaintiff must provide the original plus a judge’s copy of every document filed. In

addition, Plaintiff must send an exact copy of any Court filing to Defendant [or to defense counsel, once an attorney

has entered an appearance on his behalf]. Every document filed must include a certificate of service stating to

whom exact copies were mailed and the date of mailing. Any paper that is sent directly to the judge or that

otherwise fails to comply with these instructions may be disregarded by the Court or returned to Plaintiff. 

Plaintiff has also filed a motion for appointment of counsel. The motion is denied. Plaintiff has no right

to counsel in a civil case. See Romanelli v. Suliene, 615 F.3d 847, 851 (7th Cir. 2010); Johnson v. Doughty, 433

F.3d 1001, 1006 (7th Cir. 2006). The case at the present time does not involve complex discovery or an evidentiary

hearing, and Plaintiff’s current pleadings indicate that he has the presence of mind and intellectual capability to

continue representing himself at this stage of the proceedings. Accordingly, his motion for the appointment of

counsel is denied without prejudice. See Pruitt v. Mote, 503 F.3d 647, 656-59. (7th Cir. 2007). Consequently, the

Court denies his motion without prejudice to renewal should the case proceed to a point that assistance of counsel

is appropriate. 

Page 2 of 2