Opinions and documents
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
PEORIA DIVISION
GERAMIE EVANS, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) 25-1208
)
BOWDEN, et al. )
)
Defendants. )
MERIT REVIEW ORDER #2
SUE E. MYERSCOUGH, U.S. District Judge:
The Court dismissed Plaintiff’s original complaint with leave to
amend. (Doc. 49). The matter is now before the Court for ruling on
Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to File an Amended Complaint. (Doc. 52).
The motion is granted.
The Court must “screen” Plaintiff’s amended complaint, and
through such process to identify and dismiss any legally insufficient
claim, or the entire action if warranted. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. A claim
is legally insufficient if it “(1) is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state
a claim upon which relief may be granted; or (2) seeks monetary
relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief.” Id.
The Court accepts the factual allegations as true, liberally
construing them in the plaintiff's favor. Turley v. Rednour, 729 F.3d
645, 649 (7th Cir. 2013). Conclusory statements and labels are
insufficient—the facts alleged must “state a claim for relief that is
plausible on its face.” Alexander v. U.S., 721 F.3d 418, 422 (7th Cir.
2013) (citation omitted).
Plaintiff alleges that Defendants White, Bozeman, Salahuddin,
Adebolu, Welsh, Bowden, Thomas, Page, Adeyanju, and Uni spread
false rumors that he was homosexual or bisexual and told him that
he did not have children knowing that the comments would cause
psychological distress and other inmates to harass him. Plaintiff
alleges that each of these defendants made the comments after he
had filed grievances and complaints pursuant to the Prison Rape
Elimination Act (PREA) against them. Plaintiff alleges that he told
mental health staff, but that they did not help or otherwise allowed
correctional staff to spread the rumors. Plaintiff alleges that
Defendant Graham did not respond to his grievances.
Plaintiff states an Eighth Amendment claim based on the
alleged harassment and a First Amendment retaliation claim
against Defendants White, Bozeman, Welsh, Bowden, Thomas,
Page, Adeyanju, and Uni. Beal v. Foster, 803 F.3d 356, 358 (7th
Cir. 2015) (verbal harassment designed to inflict psychological harm
can violate the Eighth Amendment); Daugherty v. Page, 906 F.3d
606, 610 (7th Cir. 2018).
Plaintiff cannot hold Defendant Wexford Health Sources liable
for its employees’ conduct, see Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 676
(2009), and no plausible inference arises that the Jane Doe mental
health defendants were responsible for Plaintiff’s housing or any
other remedies that may have been available. Burks v. Raemisch,
555 F.3d 592, 595 (7th Cir. 2009) (“[N]o prisoner is entitled to insist
that one employee do another’s job.”). To the extent that Plaintiff
seeks to assert a PREA claim against the defendants, PREA does
not create a private cause of action. Ross v. Gossett, 2016 WL
335991, at *4 (S.D. Ill., Jan. 28, 2016). Plaintiff’s remaining claims
will be dismissed.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED:
1. Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to File Amended
Complaint [52] is GRANTED. Clerk is directed to docket the
proposed amended complaint attached to Plaintiff’s motion.
2. Pursuant to its merit review of the Complaint under
28 U.S.C. § 1915A, the court finds that the plaintiff states an
Eighth Amendment claim based on the alleged harassment and
a First Amendment retaliation claim against Defendants White,
Bozeman, Welsh, Bowden, Thomas, Page, Adeyanju, and Uni.
Any additional claims shall not be included in the case, except
at the court’s discretion on motion by a party for good cause
shown or pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15.
3. This case is now in the process of service. The
plaintiff is advised to wait until counsel has appeared for the
defendants before filing any motions, in order to give notice to
the defendants and an opportunity to respond to those
motions. Motions filed before defendants' counsel has filed an
appearance will generally be denied as premature. The plaintiff
need not submit any evidence to the court at this time, unless
otherwise directed by the court.
4. The court will attempt service on the defendants by
mailing each defendant a waiver of service. The defendants
have 60 days from the date the waiver is sent to file an answer.
If the defendants have not filed answers or appeared through
counsel within 90 days of the entry of this order, the plaintiff
may file a motion requesting the status of service. After the
defendants have been served, the court will enter an order
setting discovery and dispositive motion deadlines.
5. With respect to a defendant who no longer works at
the address provided by the plaintiff, the entity for whom that
defendant worked while at that address shall provide to the
clerk said defendant's current work address, or, if not known,
said defendant's forwarding address. This information shall be
used only for effectuating service. Documentation of forwarding
addresses shall be retained only by the clerk and shall not be
maintained in the public docket nor disclosed by the clerk.
6. The defendants shall file an answer within 60 days of
the date the waiver is sent by the clerk. A motion to dismiss is
not an answer. The answer should include all defenses
appropriate under the Federal Rules. The answer and
subsequent pleadings shall be to the issues and claims stated in
this opinion. In general, an answer sets forth the defendants'
positions. The court does not rule on the merits of those
positions unless and until a motion is filed by the defendants.
Therefore, no response to the answer is necessary or will be
considered.
7. This district uses electronic filing, which means that,
after defense counsel has filed an appearance, defense counsel
will automatically receive electronic notice of any motion or
other paper filed by the plaintiff with the clerk. The plaintiff
does not need to mail to defense counsel copies of motions and
other papers that the plaintiff has filed with the clerk.
However, this does not apply to discovery requests and
responses. Discovery requests and responses are not filed with
the clerk. The plaintiff must mail his discovery requests and
responses directly to defendants' counsel. Discovery requests
or responses sent to the clerk will be returned unfiled, unless
they are attached to and the subject of a motion to compel.
Discovery does not begin until defense counsel has filed an
appearance and the court has entered a scheduling order,
which will explain the discovery process in more detail.
8. Counsel for the defendants is hereby granted leave to
depose the plaintiff at his place of confinement. Counsel for
the defendants shall arrange the time for the deposition.
9. The plaintiff shall immediately notify the court, in
writing, of any change in his mailing address and telephone
number. The plaintiff's failure to notify the court of a change in
mailing address or phone number will result in dismissal of this
lawsuit, with prejudice.
10. If a defendant fails to sign and return a waiver of
service to the clerk within 30 days after the waiver is sent, the
court will take appropriate steps to effect formal service
through the U.S. Marshals service on that defendant and will
require that defendant to pay the full costs of formal service
pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(d)(2).
11. The clerk is directed to enter the standard qualified
protective order pursuant to the Health Insurance Portability
and Accountability Act.
12. The clerk is directed to terminate Defendants Cook,
Good, Bohm, Miller, Eutsey, Perroka, Ramsey, Adenavo, and
Hadley.
13. The clerk is directed to add Adebolu and Uni as
defendants.
14. The clerk is directed to attempt service on White,
Bozeman, Salahuddin, Adebolu, Welsh, Bowden, Thomas, Page,
Adeyanju, and Uni pursuant to the standard procedures.
ENTERED: 2/12/2026
FOR THE COURT:
s/Sue E. Myerscough
SUE E. MYERSCOUGH
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Not legal advice. These patterns come from public court records, not ratings of judges as people. They may reflect the types of cases a judge handles, local procedures or other factors, and they do not account for the facts of any individual case. Past patterns do not predict future rulings. Records can be incomplete, months behind current activity, or matched to the wrong person; sealed and confidential cases are not included. Use this as one piece of information, never the sole basis for legal strategy or a recusal motion. Full disclaimer: https://judgefinder.io/legal/disclaimer Read the full disclaimer.