IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

KEVIN MANSON, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) No. 12 C 5288

)

OFICER BRUCE ALTON, )

)

Defendant. )

MEMORANDUM ORDER

Kevin Manson (“Manson”) has tendered a pro se 42 U.S.C.

§1983 (“Section 1983”) Complaint against Midlothian police

officer Bruce Alton (“Alton”), charging him with the use of

excessive force (shooting Manson in the chest) in the course of a

June 28, 2010 encounter between the two. This memorandum order

(“Order”) is issued sua sponte to address some preliminaries that

Manson must deal with before his case can go forward.

There is no problem with the Complaint’s substantive

allegations, for taken at face value (as they must be at this

stage of the proceedings) they state a viable Fourth Amendment

claim that satisfies the “plausibility” requirement of the

Twombly-Iqbal caselaw. Instead the problem is that Manson (who

is now in prison at FCI Terre Haute and states that he lacks the

funds to pay the $350 filing fee up front) must therefore comply

with the requirements of 28 U.S.C. §1915 (“Section 1915”) for

payment of the fee in future installments.

Indeed, Manson recognizes that, because he has accompanied
the Complaint with a letter to the Clerk of Court asking that he

be sent the appropriate forms for him to fill out. This Court is

doing so contemporaneously with the issuance of this Order, which

also draws Manson’s attention to a number of things that he must

take care of:

1. Although the Complaint was not received in the

Clerk’s Office until July 3, a few days past the second

anniversary of the encounter at issue and thus outside of

the limitations period for Section 1983 actions, as a

prisoner Manson is entitled to the benefit of the “mailbox

rule” (Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266 (1988)). Both the

Complaint and Manson’s accompanying letter are dated

June 23, but that does not necessarily mean that Manson

delivered the documents to the prison authorities for

mailing (or mailed them himself) on that same date. 

Accordingly Manson’s next mailing to the Clerk’s Office, as

provided for hereafter, should be accompanied by a statement

confirming the relevant date referred to in the preceding

sentence.

2. Manson sent only the original Complaint to the

Clerk’s Office, so that no copies were provided for the

service of process on Alton or for this Court’s chambers. 

This Court will of course take care of those items, but

Manson is advised that all future filings must be provided

2
in duplicate--one for the court file and for the other to

serve as the Judge’s copy.

3. One of the forms being sent to Manson for

completion is the In Forma Pauperis Application. That must

be accompanied by a printout covering all of the

transactions in Manson’s prison trust fund account for the

year 2012 (if he has not been in custody at FCI Terre Haute

for that entire period, a printout from the other

institution or institutions has to be furnished).

4. Although Manson has not asked for the appointment

of counsel to represent him pro bono publico, this District

Court’s procedures provide such representation for pro se

litigants who qualify both financially and in terms of

presenting a facially plausible claim. If Manson wishes

also to apply for such an appointment, he must fill out and

submit the Motion for Appointment of Counsel form that is

also being transmitted to him. It is essential that he

complete the portion of that form that states briefly

whatever efforts he has made to obtain counsel on his own.

This Court will await Manson’s further submissions. But if

those are not in hand before July 27 (failing which Manson must

file a pre-July-27 explanation for any further delay), this Court

3
would be constrained to dismiss the Complaint and this action.

________________________________________

Milton I. Shadur

Senior United States District Judge

Date: July 9, 2012

4