Matches in SCALES for { <http://schemas.scales-okn.org/rdf/scales#/DocketEntry/ilcd;;1:16-cv-01272_de151> ?p ?o ?g. }
Showing items 1 to 7 of
7
with 100 items per page.
- ilcd;;1:16-cv-01272_de151 RegisterActionDate "2018-11-01" @default.
- ilcd;;1:16-cv-01272_de151 RegisterActionDescriptionText "TEXT ORDER entered by Chief Judge James E. Shadid on 11/1/2018. Plaintiff files 112 , requesting that the Court order a status conference to discuss settlement. The Court declines to do so at this time, but advises Plaintiff that he is free to contact defense counsel to discuss the possibility of settlement. If the parties agree that a settlement might be negotiated, they are to file a joint request with the Court and the matter will be referred to Magistrate Judge Hawley. 112 is otherwise DENIED. Plaintiff files a motion for recruitment of pro bono counsel 113 , asserting that his mood disorder affects his ability to prosecute his case. Plaintiff attaches an exhibit which substantiates that he is receiving SSI benefits due to an unspecified disability. The Court does not possess the authority to require an attorney to accept pro bono appointments on civil cases such as this. Pruitt v. Mote, 503 F.3d 647, 653 (7th Cir. 2007). The most that the Court can do is to ask for volunteer counsel. Jackson v. County of McLean, 953 F.2d 1070, 1071 (7th Cir. 1992)(holding that it is a fundamental premise that indigent civil litigants have no constitutional or statutory right to be represented by counsel in federal court.). In determining whether the Court should attempt to find an attorney to voluntarily take a case, the question is whether the plaintiff appears competent to litigate his own claims, given their degree of difficulty, and this includes the tasks that normally attend litigation: evidence gathering, preparing and responding to motions and other court filings, and trial. Pruitt at 655. Here, Plaintiff has shown he is well able to proceed on his own. He has filed cogent pleadings, responses, motions to reconsider and a motion for injunctive relief. He has filed his own motion for summary judgment and responded to the motions filed by the two groups of defendants. Plaintiff had also filed a motion to compel 68 which the Court reserved, ordering defendants to provide additional information. When Plaintiff was released from custody, he filed a motion to accelerate the taking of his deposition, in advance of his move to Texas. Plaintiff also requested, and received, access to the Court's electronic CM/ECF filing system. It does not appear that Plaintiff's mental health condition has prevented him from vigorously pursuing his claims. 113 is DENIED. (VH, ilcd) (Entered: 11/01/2018)" @default.
- ilcd;;1:16-cv-01272_de151 AdministrativeID "None" @default.
- ilcd;;1:16-cv-01272_de151 OntologyLabel order @default.
- ilcd;;1:16-cv-01272_de151 hasReferenceToOtherEntry ilcd;;1:16-cv-01272_de149 @default.
- ilcd;;1:16-cv-01272_de151 hasReferenceToOtherEntry ilcd;;1:16-cv-01272_de150 @default.
- ilcd;;1:16-cv-01272_de151 hasReferenceToOtherEntry ilcd;;1:16-cv-01272_de87 @default.