Donald G. Wilkerson
How Judge Wilkerson decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
On PLRA failure-to-exhaust motions he holds a Pavey v. Conley evidentiary hearing and decides the case on a CREDIBILITY finding about whether the administrative grievance process was actually 'available' to the inmate. He repeatedly DENIES exhaustion motions where the process was rendered unavailable through no fault of the prisoner -- a transfer that left no facility willing to accept the grievance, or a counselor who never responded -- crediting the inmate's testimony (deference the district judges then honor).
“Magistrate Judge Wilkerson found West's testimony credible, and that credibility determination is entitled to deference. ... the grievance process was rendered unavailable to West because neither Menard nor the ARB would accept his grievance while he was housed at Stateville.”
Conversely, he RECOMMENDS GRANTING exhaustion motions where the inmate simply failed to use the process -- never filing a grievance, or admitting he never appealed -- and he will reject an implausible excuse for non-exhaustion as not credible.
“The Court also credits Magistrate Judge Wilkerson's assessment that Mr. Williams's account of an anonymous seven-foot-tall corrections officer who refused to accept Mr. Williams's grievances is dubious.”
Procedural preferences
He enforces case-management deadlines and recommends dismissal WITH PREJUDICE for failure to prosecute when a litigant, after a clear warning, fails to appear at a mandatory status conference or comply with court orders.
“Plaintiff has been given ample opportunity to comply with the court's orders and has failed to do so. Further, plaintiff was warned that failure to appear at the mandatory status conference on March 9, 2017, would result in the dismissal of this action and plaintiff failed to appear or advise the Court of any justification for his non-appearance.”
Motion outcomes
Counted from classified signed orders only. Percentages are shown only where the sample is large enough to be meaningful; smaller samples are reported as raw counts.
| Summary judgment N = 5 |
Granted: 2Denied: 3 | counts only |
| Motions to dismiss N = 2 |
Moot / procedural: 2 | counts only |
| Dismissal for want of prosecution N = 1 |
Granted: 1 | counts only |
A "1 of 1" is one ruling, not a tendency. Treat small samples as illustrative, not predictive.
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“The Report and Recommendation (Doc. 39) is ADOPTED in its entirety, and Defendants' motion for summary judgment (Doc. 22) is DENIED.”
“The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Wilkerson's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 34) and DENIES the motion for summary judgment on the issue of exhaustion filed by Defendants Richard Harrington and Kimberly Butler (Doc. 24).”
“the Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Wilkerson's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 73) in its entirety and DENIES the Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 46) filed by Wexford.”
“Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment on Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies (Doc. 47) is GRANTED, and the claims against Defendants Lt. Page, Sgt. Eovaldi, C/O C. McClure, C/O Gutreuter, and C/O B. Liveingston are DISMISSED without prejudice.”
“The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Wilkerson's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 60) and GRANTS Defendants' motions to dismiss for failure to exhaust administrative remedies (Docs. 30, 48). ... Plaintiff's action is DISMISSED without prejudice.”
“Defendant Fahim's motion to dismiss based on the doctrine of qualified immunity is MOOT (Doc. 50).”
“Accordingly, the Court hereby ADOPTS the Report in its entirety (Doc. 54). This matter is DISMISSED with prejudice.”
“the Court ADOPTS the Report in its entirety (Doc. 25). Respondent's motion to dismiss is granted and the case is closed. Pursuant to Rule 11 of Rules Governing 2254 Cases ... the Court denies the issuance of a certificate of appealability in this case.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 678 days (N = 15).
Median motion-to-ruling time: 226 days (N = 1).
Counts are illustrative from a capped enumeration, not an authoritative caseload census.