Brown v. Ottensmeier
3:23-cv-04057
S.D. Ill.May 19, 2025Background
- Plaintiff Kenyatta Brown, an inmate at Menard Correctional Center, brings First Amendment, Fourteenth Amendment, and conspiracy claims against various named and unnamed prison officials.
- Three unknown defendants (John Does 1-3) are alleged to have played roles in three separate incidents involving cell searches, authorizing an inmate's unscheduled release, and interfering with Brown's legal mail.
- Warden Anthony Wills was added in his official capacity primarily to help identify these unknown officers.
- Discovery to date has exchanged incident reports, shift rosters, and other records, but has not yet identified the Doe defendants.
- The Court finds previous efforts insufficient and orders further affidavits, additional document review, and explanation of procedures, with a deadline for compliance.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Identification of Doe 1 (officer with Huffman on 8/5/21) | Doe 1 accompanied a search; can’t ID by sight | Info is insufficient; gave rosters but cannot identify | Ordered affidavits & more steps to ID Doe 1, including video, etc. |
| Identification of Doe 2 (authorizing Sanders’ release) | Only Internal Affairs can authorize; needs docs | Roster has 10 possible; no sole responsibility | Ordered more docs, process affidavit, efforts to narrow Doe 2 |
| Identification of Doe 3 (intercepted mail, called law firm) | Officer intercepted mail; needs related reports | No relevant reports; roster too broad | Ordered all mail-related records & identifying recipient of package |
| Sufficiency of discovery efforts by defendants | More info needed to ID Does | Have made some effort, info still lacking | Must do even more; may order further hearings if still unresolved |
Key Cases Cited
None cited in the opinion text provided.