United States District Court, E.D. Wisconsin
MICHAEL S. JOHNSON, Plaintiff,
WARDEN SCOTT ECKSTEIN, JOHN KIND, MICHAEL SCHULTZ, CHRISTOPHER STEVENS, JAY VAN LANEN, WILLIAM SWIEKATOWSKI, JAMES ELSINGER, DARCY STEVENS, CHRIS HEIL, and PATRICK BRANT, Defendants.
DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
AND TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER (DKT. NO. 33); DENYING
DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO REVISE SUMMARY JUDGMENT BRIEFING
SCHEDULE (DKT. NO. 43); GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR
LEAVE TO FILE EXCESS PAGES (DKT. NO. 45) AND DENYING
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO COMPEL (DKT. NO. 50)
PAMELA PEPPER, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
August 6, 2018, Judge Barbara B. Crabb allowed the plaintiff
to proceed on his Eighth Amendment claim against defendants
Van Lanen and Kind for subjecting him to a substantial risk
of harm by informing other staff and inmates the plaintiff
had orchestrated a gang-related assault; his First Amendment
retaliation claim against defendants Swiekatowski, Schultz,
James Elsinger, Chris Heil, Darcy Stevens, Christopher
Stevens and Patrick Brant for the plaintiff’s filing of
specific inmate complaints and for the plaintiff declining to
help reduce gang activity; and his Fourteenth Amendment due
process claim against defendants Schultz and Elsinger
regarding four specific hearings. Dkt. No. 14 at 9-17. She
also allowed him to proceed against defendant Scott Eckstein
in his official capacity as warden for purposes of pursuing
injunctive relief on his First and Eighth Amendment claims.
Id. On October 24, 2018, Judge Crabb granted the
defendants’ motion to transfer the case to this
district. Dkt. No. 24. This court issued a scheduling order
on October 30, 2018, setting February 27, 2019 as the
deadline for completing discovery and March 29, 2019 as the
deadline for filing dispositive motions. Dkt. No. 28.
then, the plaintiff has filed a motion for a preliminary
injunction and temporary restraining order, dkt. no. 33, and
a motion to compel discovery, dkt. no. 50. The defendants
have filed a motion for a revised briefing schedule, dkt. no.
42, and a motion for leave to file excess pages, dkt. no. 45.
The order resolves those motions.
The Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction and
Temporary Restraining Order (Dkt. No.
time he filed his motion for a preliminary injunction and
temporary restraining order, the plaintiff was representing
himself. About two and a half months later, counsel made an
appearance on behalf of the plaintiff. Dkt. No. 45. The
plaintiff’s lawyer has not withdrawn the motion for
motion contains a list of incidents that the plaintiff claims
constitute retaliation against him by various staff members.
The incidents fall into several categories.
o Attempts to get other inmates to turn on the
• On March 14, 2018 (the day the court received the
complaint), defendants Kind and Van Lanen attempted to get
inmate Shirell Watkins to turn on the plaintiff during an
interview of the inmate in front of the plaintiff. Dkt. No.
34 at 2-3. The defendants purportedly told Watkins that the
December 2016 assault on him was ordered by the plaintiff.
Dkt. No. 35, Ex. 1 at 15. According to the plaintiff, Watkins
was released from restrictive housing that same day and was
expected to be an informant for Kind and Van Lanen against
the plaintiff. Dkt. No. 35 at 3.
• At some point, after a gang riot had erupted and was
extinguished, the plaintiff states that Kind and Van Lanen
interviewed several inmates including Gregory Banks regarding
the riot. Dkt. No. 34 at 6. Although the plaintiff was not
involved in the riot, Banks, who was, said that the
defendants mentioned the plaintiff's name during
Banks’s interview. Specifically, the plaintiff states
he was told that Van Lanen said, “Amir isn’t
going to let it go.” Id.
• The plaintiff alleges that Van Lanen also interviewed
inmate Dereal Lott, and Van Lanen purportedly attempted to
scare and threaten Lott into cooperating “by claiming
that the plaintiff is going to retaliate against him for
their attack on the vice lords.” Id.
• The plaintiff says Van Lanen had an argument with an
inmate named Antoine Nelson on August 22, 2018, during which
the two debated about the plaintiff and his lawsuit.
Id. Van Lanen allegedly called the plaintiff a liar.
• On November 22, 2018, the plaintiff alleges that Van
Lanen attempted to bribe inmate Jesse Schlichting to
“fabricate gang evidence against the plaintiff and his
lawsuit.” Id. at 8.
• Van Lanen also tried to get two other inmates to say
that the plaintiff ordered and orchestrated Watkins December