Matches in SCALES for { <scales/DocketEntry/ilcd;;1:16-cv-01191_de50> ?p ?o ?g. }
Showing items 1 to 5 of
5
with 100 items per page.
- ilcd;;1:16-cv-01191_de50 RegisterActionDate "2017-03-27" @default.
- ilcd;;1:16-cv-01191_de50 RegisterActionDescriptionText "TEXT ORDER entered by Judge Colin Stirling Bruce on 3/27/2017. Plaintiff files 37 , requesting a 9-month extension in which to complete discovery. The Court sees no need for such a lengthy extension. It will grant 37 to the extent that Plaintiff will have 30 days beyond the current April 14, 2017 deadline. Plaintiff files 38 , requesting the recruitment of pro bono counsel. Plaintiff pleads that his limited education, segregation status and mental health diagnoses impede his ability to prosecute his case. 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 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 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, 503 F.3d at 655. 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. Id. at 655. Plaintiff has filed a conditions of confinement case which concerns facts of which he has particular knowledge and which is not unduly complex. The Court finds that, based upon the current record, the Plaintiff appears competent to litigate this case himself. 38 is DENIED. (DS, ilcd) (Entered: 03/27/2017)" @default.
- ilcd;;1:16-cv-01191_de50 AdministrativeID "None" @default.
- ilcd;;1:16-cv-01191_de50 hasReferenceToOtherEntry ilcd;;1:16-cv-01191_de48 @default.
- ilcd;;1:16-cv-01191_de50 hasReferenceToOtherEntry ilcd;;1:16-cv-01191_de49 @default.