Jones v. Indiana State Prison

• Court: District Court, N.D. Indiana
• Decided: April 4, 2024
• Docket: 3:24-cv-00203
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA SOUTH BEND DIVISION

PERCY JONES, JR.,

Plaintiff,

v. CAUSE NO. 3:24-CV-203-JTM-JEM

INDIANA STATE PRISON,

Defendant.

OPINION and ORDER Percy Jones, Jr., a prisoner without a lawyer, filed a complaint alleging he was attacked by fellow inmates at the Indiana State Prison in 1992. (DE # 1.) Jones seeks leave to proceed in forma pauperis. (DE # 3.) Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i), the court must dismiss a case that is frivolous. This case is legally frivolous because it was filed three decades after the statute of limitations expired. Snodderly v. R.U.F.F. Drug Enforcement Task Force, 239 F.3d 892, 894 (7th Cir. 2001) (“Indiana’s two-year statute of limitations . . . is applicable to all causes of action brought in Indiana under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.”). Further, Jones sues the Indiana State Prison, but it is not a suable entity. See Smith v. Knox County Jail, 666 F.3d 1037, 1040 (7th Cir. 2012); Will v. Michigan Dep’t of State Police, 491 U.S. 58, 70 (1989); de Lima Silva v. Dep’t of Corr., 917 F.3d 546, 565 (7th Cir. 2019). Jones says he did not name any individuals because he does not know their names. Had he filed this case sooner, the court could have helped him identify the proper defendants. See Rodriguez v. Plymouth Ambulance Serv., 577 F.3d 816, 822 (7th Cir. 2009); Donald v. Cook Cty. Sheriff’s Dep’t, 95 F.3d 548, 556 (7th Cir. 1996). Here, however, it is too late to do that. See Jackson v. Kotter, 541 F.3d 688, 696 (7th Cir. 2008).

“The usual standard in civil cases is to allow defective pleadings to be corrected, especially in early stages, at least where amendment would not be futile.” Abu-Shawish v. United States, 898 F.3d 726, 738 (7th Cir. 2018). However, “courts have broad discretion to deny leave to amend where . . . the amendment would be futile.” Hukic v. Aurora Loan Servs., 588 F.3d 420, 432 (7th Cir. 2009). Such is the case here. For these reasons, this case is DISMISSED under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i).

SO ORDERED. Date: April 4, 2024 s/James T. Moody . JUDGE JAMES T. MOODY UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT