Matches in SCALES for { <http://schemas.scales-okn.org/rdf/scales#/DocketEntry/ilcd;;4:16-cv-04204_de85> ?p ?o ?g. }
Showing items 1 to 9 of
9
with 100 items per page.
- ilcd;;4:16-cv-04204_de85 RegisterActionDate "2019-02-04" @default.
- ilcd;;4:16-cv-04204_de85 RegisterActionDescriptionText "TEXT ORDER: Entered by Judge Sara Darrow on 2/4/2019. Plaintiff filed a Motion to Strike Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment 68 , asking the Court to strike Defendants' motion because Plaintiff did not receive a copy of it. Defendants provided exhibits showing that Plaintiff signed for the relevant documents about a week after the motion was filed. See 70 . Plaintiff's motion 68 is therefore DENIED. Defendants' unopposed Motion to Supplement 69 is GRANTED. The Court will consider the signed attestation in ruling upon Defendants motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff's Motion 74 is GRANTED to the extent that it seeks additional time to respond to Defendants' motion for summary judgment and DENIED with leave to renew as to the request for appointment of counsel. Plaintiff shall respond to Defendants motion for summary judgment by March 14, 2019. As to the request for counsel, Plaintiff has no constitutional or statutory right to counsel in this case. In considering the Plaintiff's motion, the court asks: (1) has the indigent Plaintiff made a reasonable attempt to obtain counsel or been effectively precluded from doing so; and if so, (2) given the difficulty of the case, does the plaintiff appear competent to litigate it himself? Pruitt v. Mote, 503 F.3d 647, 654-55 (7th Cir. 2007). Plaintiff previously attached copies of letters he sent to and received from attorneys regarding his requests for representation, and, therefore, the Court finds that Plaintiff has satisfied the first prong. Plaintiff, however, has personal knowledge of the facts, he has been able to adequately communicate them to the Court, his filings have cited relevant case law, he has demonstrated an ability to make appropriate counterarguments, and this case does not appear overly complex at this time. Further, as noted in previous orders, Plaintiff has litigation experience in federal court. Although Plaintiff mentions mental health issues, a recent attack, and the death of a witness in his motion, he does not provide any dates, information regarding treatment he has received, or other details necessary for the Court to ascertain whether these factors affect Plaintiff's ability to litigate at this stage. Accordingly, the Court finds that Plaintiff is capable of representing himself at this time. Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File a Reply 73 is DENIED as moot. (LN, ilcd) (Entered: 02/04/2019)" @default.
- ilcd;;4:16-cv-04204_de85 AdministrativeID "None" @default.
- ilcd;;4:16-cv-04204_de85 OntologyLabel order @default.
- ilcd;;4:16-cv-04204_de85 hasReferenceToOtherEntry ilcd;;4:16-cv-04204_de77 @default.
- ilcd;;4:16-cv-04204_de85 hasReferenceToOtherEntry ilcd;;4:16-cv-04204_de78 @default.
- ilcd;;4:16-cv-04204_de85 hasReferenceToOtherEntry ilcd;;4:16-cv-04204_de79 @default.
- ilcd;;4:16-cv-04204_de85 hasReferenceToOtherEntry ilcd;;4:16-cv-04204_de82 @default.
- ilcd;;4:16-cv-04204_de85 hasReferenceToOtherEntry ilcd;;4:16-cv-04204_de84 @default.