Chalmers v. Bautista et al
| Mark Chalmers |
| Catalino Bautista, Lois Lindorff, The Bantry Group Corporation, Wexford Health Sources Inc, Rhonda Ryan, Sarah Faetanini, Paular Blackmen, Paular Young, Mechelle Haley, Lorna Stokes, Peggy Hendricks, Amanda Lamb, Jame Mudd, Leiola Parish, L. Vollmer, Steve Gans, Racheal Lemay, Stephanie Dorethy, Mark Williams, Danni McNeely, Authur Funk, Kevin C Halloran and Casey Lewis |
| 4:2017cv04150 |
| June 5, 2017 |
| U.S. District Court for the Central District of Illinois |
| Rock Island Office |
| Knox |
| Sara Darrow |
| Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
11
MERIT REVIEW OPINION (Rule 16 Deadline 9/19/2017) - Entered by Judge Harold A. Baker on 7/21/2017. See written Order. The clerk is directed to enter the standard qualified protective order pursuant to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountabil ity Act. The clerk is directed to terminate Defendants Lindorff, The Bantry Group Corporation, Ryan, Faetanini, Blackmen, Young, Haley, Stokes, Hendricks, Lamb, Mudd, Parish, Vollmer, Gans, Lemay, Dorethy, Williams, McNeely, Funk, Halloran, and Le wis. The clerk is directed to attempt service on the remaining defendants pursuant to the standard procedures. Plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction 1 and motion for leave to supplement 10 are denied. Plaintiff's motion to re quest counsel 4 is denied with leave to renew. 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 obta in 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), citing Farmer v. Haas, 990 F.2d 319, 322 (7th Cir.1993). Plaintiff has not shown that he made a reasonable effort to obtain counsel on his own. A plaintiff usually does this by attaching copies of letters sent to attorneys seeking representation and copies of any responses recei ved. Because Plaintiff has not satisfied the first prong, the Court does not address the second. Plaintiff's motion to disqualify attorney general 5 is denied. Plaintiff's allegations contained in the motion are speculative at best.(LN, ilcd)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. 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
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.
