Filed: Jan. 07, 2016
Latest Update: Jan. 07, 2016
Summary: OPINION DENYING MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON EXHAUSTION JAMES E. SHADID , District Judge . This case is in discovery on Plaintiff's claim that the conditions of the Peoria County Jail violated constitutional standards during Plaintiff's detention there. Defendants have filed their second summary judgment motion on exhaustion, addressing the questions raised by the Court in denying the first motion for summary judgment. Defendants' supplemental summary judgment motion still does not carry
Summary: OPINION DENYING MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON EXHAUSTION JAMES E. SHADID , District Judge . This case is in discovery on Plaintiff's claim that the conditions of the Peoria County Jail violated constitutional standards during Plaintiff's detention there. Defendants have filed their second summary judgment motion on exhaustion, addressing the questions raised by the Court in denying the first motion for summary judgment. Defendants' supplemental summary judgment motion still does not carry ..
More
OPINION DENYING MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON EXHAUSTION
JAMES E. SHADID, District Judge.
This case is in discovery on Plaintiff's claim that the conditions of the Peoria County Jail violated constitutional standards during Plaintiff's detention there. Defendants have filed their second summary judgment motion on exhaustion, addressing the questions raised by the Court in denying the first motion for summary judgment.
Defendants' supplemental summary judgment motion still does not carry Defendants' burden of proving exhaustion. Turley v. Rednour, 729 F.3d 645, 650 (7th Cir. 2013)(burden of proof of exhaustion is on the defendants). Plaintiff says he filed requests1 and got no responses. Defendants say they have no record that Plaintiff filed a request. However, Defendants also concede that a detainee must turn in all three copies of the triplicate request form. (d/e 23-1, p. 6.) That means a detainee cannot keep the "pink" copy of the form before submitting the form, and therefore has no proof, other than his own testimony, that he filed a request. Compare with Briseno v. Bukowski, 14-CV-2263 (C.D. Ill)(dismissing for failure to exhaust where Kankakee County Jail procedures require a detainee to keep the pink copy before turning request in, and the plaintiff had not explained why he had no pink copy). Defendants also do not track the receipt of a grievance from an officer to its intended recipient, for example, by providing a signed receipt to the detainee from the officer taking the grievance. Without some proof of a chain of evidence, Defendants cannot meet their burden of either demonstrating exhaustion or creating a disputed fact for an evidentiary hearing. This Court recently reached a similar conclusion in another case involving IDOC grievance procedures. Daniels v. Hubert, 2015 WL 5734783 (C.D. Ill. 2015).
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED:
1) Defendants' motion for summary judgment on exhaustion is denied (23).
2) Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on exhaustion is denied (25).
3) Defendants' motion to stay discovery is denied (28).
