-APR Frohwerk v. Buss et al, No. 2:2011cv00070 - Document 109 (N.D. Ind. 2011)
Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER striking 1 Pro Se Complaint filed by David Frohwerk. Amended Complaint to be filed by 7/21/2011. If pltf does not respond by the deadline, this case will be dismissed without further notice. Signed by Chief Judge Philip P Simon on 6/20/11. cc: w/forms to pltf(kjp)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA HAMMOND DIVISION DAVID FROHWERK, Plaintiff, vs. EDWIN G. BUSS, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CAUSE NO. 2:11-CV-70-PS-APR OPINION AND ORDER David Frohwerk, a pro se prisoner confined at the Westville Correctional Facility, submitted a handwritten complaint under 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983. He names multiple defendants, and appears to be raising unrelated claims for violations of the First Amendment s free exercise clause, the Eighth Amendment s cruel and unusual punishments clause, and the Fourteenth Amendment s due process clause. Litigants cannot join unrelated claims against unrelated defendants in one case: A buckshot complaint . . . say, a suit complaining that A defrauded the plaintiff, B defamed him, C punched him, D failed to pay a debt, and E infringed his copyright, all in different transactions should be rejected . . . . [M]ultiple claims against a single party are fine, but Claim A against Defendant 1 should not be joined with unrelated Claim B against Defendant 2. Unrelated claims against different defendants belong in different suits . . . . George v. Smith, 507 F.3d 605, 607 (7th Cir. 2007). Additionally, Mr. Frohwerk says he is suing John and Jane Does acting in their individual and/or official capacities, but he doesn t provide any description of these individuals. If he wants to proceed against unnamed defendants, he must provide some identifying information about them, such as their job function, and explain how they were personally involved in the violation of his rights. Mr. Frohwerk sought leave of the Court in this case to amend his complaint, and the Court afforded him until June 6, 2011, within which to file an amended complaint. Mr. Frohwerk, however, did not file an amended complaint in this case; instead, he filed seven new cases: Frohwerk v. Johnson, 2:11cv133 RM; Frohwerk v. Levenhagen, 2:11cv199 TLS; Frohwerk v. Correctional Medical Services,2:11cv200 TLS; Frohwerk v. Unknown Westville Correctional Facility Employees, 2:11cv201 WL; Frohwerk v. Officer Armstrong, 2:11cv202 WL; Frohwerk v. Bean, 2:11cv209 PS; and Frohwerk v. Unknown Westville Correctional Facility Officials, 2:11cv210 RL. In some of these complaints, Mr. Frohwerk makes many of the same allegations against the same defendants as he presents to the Court in his long, complex complaint in this case. Mr. Frohwerk cannot proceed against a defendant for the same claim in multiple cases. Because the complaint in this case contains unrelated claims against multiple defendants, and because the Plaintiff appears to have subsequently filed other cases raising the claims against the defendants he presents to the Court in this case, this Court will strike the complaint in this case and allow Mr. Frohwerk to file an amended complaint bringing only related claims. The Court advises Mr. Frohwerk that his amended complaint in this case should not contain unrelated claims, and should not contain any claim he has already raised in one of the seven cases he has filed since he filed his original complaint in this case. For the foregoing reasons, the court: (1) STRIKES the complaint [DE 1]; (2) DIRECTS the clerk to place this cause number on a blank Prisoner Section 2 1983 Complaint and send it to the Plaintiff; (3) AFFORDS the Plaintiff to and including July 21, 2011, within which to file an amended complaint that contains no unrelated claims, and does not contain any claim he has already raised in one of the seven cases he has filed since he filed his original complaint in this case; and (4) CAUTIONS the Plaintiff that if he does not respond by the deadline, this case will be dismissed without further notice. SO ORDERED. ENTERED: June 20, 2011 /s/ Philip P. Simon PHILIP P. SIMON, CHIEF JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 3
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
