Order Form (01/2005)

United States District Court, Northern District of Illinois

Name of Assigned Judge

or Magistrate Judge

RONALD A. GUZMÁN Sitting Judge if Other

than Assigned Judge

CASE NUMBER 12 C 4334 DATE June 7, 2012

CASE

TITLE

Larry Banks (#B-42423) vs. Tom Dart, et al.

DOCKET ENTRY TEXT:

The plaintiff’s motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis [#3] is granted. The court authorizes and orders

the trust fund officer at the plaintiff’s place of incarceration to deduct $8.00 from the plaintiff’s account for

payment to the Clerk of Court as an initial partial filing fee, and to continue making monthly deductions in

accordance with this order. The clerk shall send a copy of this order to the trust fund officer at the Pinckneyville

Correctional Center. On the court’s own motion, Thomas Dart is dismissed as a defendant on preliminary review

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. The clerk is directed to issue summonses for service on defendants Elwood and

Johnson by the U.S. Marshal. The clerk is further directed to send the plaintiff a Magistrate Judge Consent Form

and Instructions for Submitting Documents along with a copy of this order. 

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

STATEMENT

The plaintiff, currently an Illinois state prisoner, has brought this pro se civil rights action pursuant to 42

U.S.C. § 1983. The plaintiff claims that the defendants, officials at the Cook County Jail, violated the plaintiff’s

constitutional rights by using unjustified force against him and by acting with deliberate indifference to his

serious medical needs. More specifically, the plaintiff alleges that officers maced him for no reason, then denied

him needed medical care or even the opportunity to wash off the chemical agents. 

The 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 $8.00. The trust fund officer at the plaintiff’s

place of incarceration is authorized and ordered to collect the partial filing fee from the plaintiff’s trust fund

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

fund officer is directed to collect monthly payments from the plaintiff’s trust fund account in an amount equal

to 20% of the preceding month’s income credited to the account. Monthly payments 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,

(CONTINUED)

mjm

Page 1 of 3
STATEMENT (continued)

attn: Cashier’s Desk, 20th Floor, and shall clearly identify the plaintiff’s name and this case number. This payment

obligation will follow the plaintiff wherever he may be transferred. 

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

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

cause of action against defendants Elwood and Johnson. Unjustified force against a pretrial detainee violates the

inmate’s rights under the Fourteenth Amendment. See, e.g., Rice ex rel. Rice v. Correctional Medical Services,

675 F.3d 650, 667-68 (7th Cir. 2012). Furthermore, inmates have a right to receive treatment for their serious

medical needs. Id. at 671. While a more fully developed record may belie the plaintiff’s allegations, defendants

Elwood and Johnson must respond to the complaint. 

However, the complaint fails to state a cause of action against Sheriff Dart. The plaintiff has alleged no

facts suggesting Dart’s direct, personal involvement, as required by J.H. ex rel. Higgin v. Johnson, 346 F.3d 788,

793 (7th Cir. 2003), inter alia. Nor has the plaintiff indicated that the alleged violation of his constitutional rights

occurred at Dart’s direction or with his knowledge and consent. Id. Section 1983 creates a cause of action based

on personal liability and predicated upon fault; thus, “to be liable under § 1983, an individual defendant must have

caused or participated in a constitutional deprivation.” Pepper v. Village of Oak Park, 430 F.3d 809, 810 (7th Cir.

2005). The doctrine of respondeat superior (blanket supervisory liability) does not apply to actions filed under

42 U.S.C. § 1983. See, e.g., Kinslow v. Pullara, 538 F.3d 687, 692 (7th Cir. 2008). Because the plaintiff has failed

to state any facts showing that Dart was personally involved in–or even aware of–the alleged circumstances giving

rise to the complaint, Dart is dismissed as a defendant in this matter.

The clerk shall issue summonses forthwith. The United States Marshals Service is appointed to serve

defendants Elwood and Johnson. Any service forms necessary for the plaintiff to complete will be sent by the

Marshal as appropriate to serve the defendants with process. The U.S. Marshal is directed to make all reasonable

efforts to serve the defendants. If either defendant can no longer be found at the work address provided by the

plaintiff, the Cook County Department of Corrections shall furnish the Marshal with the defendant’s 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 the defendants in the manner prescribed by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(d)(2) before attempting

personal service. 

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

the Prisoner Correspondent. The plaintiff is reminded that he must provide the court with the original plus

a complete judge’s copy, including any exhibits, of every document filed. In addition, the plaintiff must send

an exact copy of any court filing to the defendants [or to defense counsel, once an attorney has entered an

(CONTINUED)

Page 2 of 3
STATEMENT (continued)

appearance on behalf of the defendants]. Every document filed with the court 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 the plaintiff.

Page 3 of 3