Matches in SCALES for { <scales/DocketEntry/ilcd;;1:16-cv-01191_de46> ?p ?o ?g. }
Showing items 1 to 4 of
4
with 100 items per page.
- ilcd;;1:16-cv-01191_de46 RegisterActionDate "2017-01-10" @default.
- ilcd;;1:16-cv-01191_de46 RegisterActionDescriptionText "TEXT ORDER Entered by Judge Colin Stirling Bruce on 1/10/17. Plaintiff files 35 , a motion for recruitment of pro-bono counsel. Plaintiff's prior request for counsel had been denied as he had not provided documentation that he attempted to secure counsel on his. See 10/19/16 text order. Plaintiff reasserts his motion and includes two letters he has received from prospective counsel, denying the representation. Plaintiff, therefore, has satisfied the first prong of the test identified in Pruitt v. Mote, 503 F.3d 647, 653 (7th Cir. 2007). The Court now considers the section prong of the Pruitt test, "whether the difficulty of the case factually and legally exceeds the particular plaintiff's capacity as a layperson to coherently present it to the judge or jury himself...." The test for appointment of counsel is not whether the defendant has counsel or whether a lawyer could more effectively handle the case. The test is whether the litigant is competent to litigate his own claims. Pruitt, 503 F.3d at 655. While Plaintiff claims that he has attention deficit disorder, depression and other "unknown" mental health issues, the Plaintiff appears competent to litigate this case himself. Plaintiff's conditions of confinement claims are based upon facts within his own personal knowledge and are not unduly complex. 35 is DENIED. (SKR, ilcd) (Entered: 01/10/2017)" @default.
- ilcd;;1:16-cv-01191_de46 AdministrativeID "None" @default.
- ilcd;;1:16-cv-01191_de46 hasReferenceToOtherEntry ilcd;;1:16-cv-01191_de45 @default.