Marcure v. Express Employment Professionals
| Brannen Marcure |
| Express Employment Professionals |
| 3:2020cv03207 |
| August 14, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Central District of Illinois |
| Richard Mills |
| Tom Schanzle-Haskins |
| Civil Rights: Jobs |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 11, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
TEXT ORDER by U.S. Magistrate Judge Tom Schanzle-Haskins. By Text Order dated 8/20/2020, the Court ordered Plaintiff to file additional complete financial information by 9/14/2020 to allow the Court to make a determination regarding Plaintiff's application to proceed without paying fees or costs. Instead, pro se Plaintiff has filed a Motion for a Continuance Extending Time #5 (Motion) which states he is now able to pay the filing fee and requesting additional time to make payment. Plaintiff's Motion #5 is ALLOWED. Plaintiff is granted an extension to 10/15/2020 in which to pay the filing fee in full. Accordingly, Plaintiff's Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying Fees or Costs #2 is DENIED as moot. Plaintiff's Motion to Request Counsel #3 is DENIED. The Court notes that civil litigants have no constitutional or statutory right to be represented by counsel in federal court. Zarnes v. Rhodes, 64 F.3d 285, 288 (7th Cir., 1995). The decision to appoint counsel lies within the broad discretion of the Court. Jackson v. County of McLean, 953 F.2d 1070, 1071 (7th Cir., 1992). The Court concludes that appointment of counsel is not warranted in this case at this time. The Plaintiff has alleged no physical or mental disability that might preclude him from adequately investigating the facts giving rise to his Complaint. The Plaintiff appears capable of presenting his case. The Plaintiff has not shown any attempt to retain counsel. This typically requires writing to several lawyers and attaching the responses. The Court grants pro se litigants wide latitude in the handling of their lawsuits. Entered by Magistrate Judge Tom Schanzle-Haskins on 9/11/2020. (MAS, ilcd)
|
| Filing 5 MOTION to Continue/Extend Time to pay cost by Plaintiff Brannen Marcure. Responses due by 9/17/2020 (MAS, ilcd) |
|
Filing 4
TEXT ORDER by U.S. Magistrate Judge Tom Schanzle-Haskins. Before the Court is Plaintiffs Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying Fees or Costs #2 . The short form application filled out by the Plaintiff indicates $1,200 per month in wages and $300 per month in expenses. The information provided is insufficient to determine whether the Plaintiff should be allowed to proceed in this matter without paying fees and costs. Plaintiff is ordered to file additional complete financial information on the form attached to this Text Order to allow the Court to make a determination regarding Plaintiff's application to proceed without paying fees or costs on or before 9/14/2020. Entered by Magistrate Judge Tom Schanzle-Haskins on 8/20/2020. (MAS, ilcd)
|
| Filing 3 MOTION to Request Counsel by Plaintiff Brannen Marcure. Responses due by 8/28/2020 (AEM, ilcd) |
| Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Plaintiff Brannen Marcure. Responses due by 8/28/2020 (AEM, ilcd) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Express Employment Professionals, filed by Brannen Marcure.(AEM, ilcd) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Illinois Central District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
| Search for this case: Marcure v. Express Employment Professionals | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Brannen Marcure | |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: Express Employment Professionals | |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
