Pannell v. Everly, 091521 INCA, 19A-PL-962

Docket Nº19A-PL-962
Opinion JudgeROBB, JUDGE.
Party NameDavid Pannell, Appellant, v. Allison M. Everly, et al., Appellees,
AttorneyAPPELLANT PRO SE David Pannell Pendleton, Indiana. ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEES Theodore E. Rokita Attorney General of Indiana Natalie F. Weiss Deputy Attorney General Indianapolis, Indiana.
Judge PanelBailey, J., and May, J., concur.
Case DateSeptember 15, 2021
CourtCourt of Appeals of Indiana

David Pannell, Appellant,

v.

Allison M. Everly, et al., Appellees,

No. 19A-PL-962

Court of Appeals of Indiana

September 15, 2021

Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), this Memorandum Decision shall not be regarded as precedent or cited before any court except for the purpose of establishing the defense of res judicata, collateral estoppel, or the law of the case.

Appeal from the LaPorte Superior Court The Honorable Richard R. Stalbrink Jr., Judge Trial Court Cause No. 46DO2-1801-PL-113

APPELLANT PRO SE David Pannell Pendleton, Indiana.

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEES Theodore E. Rokita Attorney General of Indiana Natalie F. Weiss Deputy Attorney General Indianapolis, Indiana.

MEMORANDUM DECISION

ROBB, JUDGE.

Case Summary and Issue

[¶1] David Pannell, a prison inmate, sued several Department of Correction employees, alleging a due process violation during disciplinary proceedings at the Indiana State Prison. Pannell appeals the trial court's denial of his motion for relief from judgment. Concluding that the trial court did not err by denying Pannell's motion for relief from judgment, we affirm.

Facts and Procedural History

[¶2] On January 23, 2018, Pannell filed a complaint in LaPorte Superior Court against Allison Everly, Doreem Kirby, and Ron Neal (the "Defendants") alleging violations of 42 U.S.C. sections 1983, 1985, and 1986. Pannell alleged the Defendants' conduct surrounding a prison disciplinary proceeding violated his Fourteenth Amendment rights. The Defendants removed the action to federal district court. The district court dismissed Pannell's federal claims without prejudice, stating that "Pannell cannot litigate in this court because he is a restricted filer." Appellant's Appendix, Volume II at 17 (citing Pannell v. Neal, Case No. 17-1573 (7th Cir. April 11, 2017)). However, because the restriction did not preclude Pannell from litigating in state court, the district court remanded all state law claims to the LaPorte Superior Court. See id.

[¶3] On March 22, 2018, Pannell filed a motion requesting that the trial court reinstate the federal claims dismissed by the district court. The Defendants filed a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and failure to state a claim, arguing that the district court dismissed all of Pannell's federal claims and Pannell failed to bring any state claims. On April 20, 2018, the trial court denied Pannell's motion to reinstate claims, granted the Defendants' motion to dismiss, and dismissed Pannell's claims with prejudice.

[¶4] On June 1, 2018, Pannell filed a notice of appeal challenging the trial court's order granting dismissal. On November 20, 2018, this court dismissed his appeal as untimely.

[¶5] On April 5, 2019, Pannell filed in the trial court a "Motion for Relief of Void Judgment Pursuant to Ind. TR. 60(B)(4)"1 arguing that the federal district court's order dismissing his complaint was void and that the trial court should have adjudicated his constitutional claims. See Appellant's App., Vol. II at 48. The trial court denied the motion. Pannell now appeals.

Discussion and Decision

I. Standard of Review

[¶6] Although Pannell is proceeding pro se, such litigants are held to the same standard as trained attorneys and are afforded no inherent leniency simply by virtue of being self-represented. Zavodnik v. Harper, 17 N.E.3d 259, 266 (Ind. 2014). This court will "not become an advocate for a party, or address arguments that are inappropriate or too poorly developed or expressed to be understood." Basic v. Amouri, 58 N.E.3d 980, 984 (Ind.Ct.App. 2016) (internal quotations...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT