Jones v. Szul et al
| Davion Jermaine Jones |
| Szul, Klikas and Borrero |
| 1:2023cv06518 |
| August 29, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Steven C Seeger |
| Civil Rights (Prison Condition) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State) |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 5, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 6 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Steven C. Seeger: Plaintiff's motion for the appointment of counsel (Dckt. No. #4 ) is hereby denied without prejudice. In a civil case, the Court has discretion to recruit a lawyer for individuals who cannot afford to hire one. Navejar v. Iyiola, 718 F.3d 692, 696 (7th Cir. 2013); 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(1); Ray v. Wexford Health Sources, Inc., 706 F.3d 864, 866-67 (7th Cir. 2013). In exercising its discretion, the Court must consider two things: "(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?" Eagan v. Dempsey, 987 F.3d 667, 682 (7th Cir. 2021) (quoting Pruitt v. Mote, 503 F.3d 647, 654-55 (7th Cir. 2007)). "The first inquiry 'requires the indigent litigant to reasonably attempt to get a lawyer.' This is a mandatory, threshold inquiry that must be determined before moving to the second inquiry. The second inquiry requires consideration of both the factual and legal complexity of the plaintiff's claims and the competence of the plaintiff to litigate those claims himself." Id. at *3-4 (quoting Thomas v. Wardell, 951 F.3d 854, 859 (7th Cir. 2020)). "A litigant's good faith but unsuccessful effort to obtain counsel is a necessary condition to the provision of judicial assistance to recruit a lawyer." Pickett v. CTA, 930 F.3d 869, 871 (7th Cir. 2019). "[D]eciding whether to recruit counsel 'is a difficult decision: Almost everyone would benefit from having a lawyer, but there are too many indigent litigants and too few lawyers willing and able to volunteer for these cases.'" Henderson v. Ghosh, 755 F.3d 559, 564 (7th Cir. 2014) (quoting Olson v. Morgan, 750 F.3d 708, 711 (7th Cir. 2014)). "The question is not whether a lawyer would present the case more effectively than the pro se plaintiff; 'if that were the test, 'district judges would be required to request counsel for every indigent litigant.' Rather, the question is whether the difficulty of the casefactually and legallyexceeds the particular plaintiff's capacity as a layperson to coherently present it to the judge or jury himself." Pruitt, 503 F.3d at 655 (citation omitted). "The guiding rule has always been that appointment of counsel is the exception rather than the rule in pro se prisoner litigation." Tayr Kilaab al Ghashiyah (Khan) v. Carr, 2023 WL 5953552, at *7 (E.D. Wis. 2023). Here, Plaintiff has not demonstrated that he made diligent attempts to find a lawyer on his own. The motion says that he tried to reach out to lawyers, but he blames the jail's mail. He "believes the lawyers [he] wrote never received [his]mail," because the jail has an "attack on all mail." (Dckt. No. #4 ) He describes the situation as follows: "incoming mail and outcoming mail 'complete censorship.'" That explanation is insufficient. Plaintiff did not reveal the names of any lawyers that he attempted to contact, or when. Who were the lawyers? The motion does not identify them. If Plaintiff makes a diligent effort to contact lawyers, Plaintiff could file another motion down the road. But as things stand, Plaintiff has not satisfied his burden of showing that he attempted to find a lawyer for himself. Mailed notice (jjr, ) |
Filing 5
ORDER: The Court denies Plaintiff's application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (Dckt. No. #3 ) without prejudice because it is stale and incomplete. If Plaintiff wishes to proceed with this action, he must either: (1) submit a renewed and complete application that is signed by Plaintiff and certified by the trust fund officer, and that includes a copy of Plaintiff's trust fund account statement showing all transactions in his account for the six-month period immediately preceding the filing of his complaint through the date he responds to this order; or (2) prepay the full $402 filing fee. If Plaintiff does not comply by November 10, 2023, the Court will summarily dismiss this case. Plaintiff must promptly update his address if he is released or transferred to another facility. If he fails to do so, this case may be subject to dismissal. The Clerk is directed to send Plaintiff a blank application to proceed in forma pauperis, along with a copy of this order. Signed by the Honorable Steven C. Seeger on 10/5/2023. Mailed notice. (jjr, )
|
| MAILED a blank application to proceed in forma pauperis and a copy of the order #5 dated 10/5/2023 to Davion Jermaine Jones. (jjr, ) |
| MAILED copy of the Clerk's Notice entry along with the Joint Consent Form to plaintiff. (nsf, ) |
| CLERK'S NOTICE: Pursuant to Local Rule 73.1(b), a United States Magistrate Judge of this court is available to conduct all proceedings in this civil action. If all parties consent to have the currently assigned United States Magistrate Judge conduct all proceedings in this case, including trial, the entry of final judgment, and all post-trial proceedings, all parties must sign their names on the attached #Consent To# form. This consent form is eligible for filing only if executed by all parties. The parties can also express their consent to jurisdiction by a magistrate judge in any joint filing, including the Joint Initial Status Report or proposed Case Management Order. (nsf, ) |
| Filing 4 MOTION by Plaintiff Davion Jermaine Jones for attorney representation. (nsf, ) |
| Filing 3 APPLICATION by Plaintiff Davion Jermaine Jones for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. (Exhibits) (nsf, ) |
| Filing 2 PRISONER CIVIL Cover Sheet. (nsf, ) |
| Filing 1 RECEIVED Complaint and 0 copies by Davion Jermaine Jones. (Exhibits, Envelope post marked 8/21/23) (nsf, ) |
| CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Steven C. Seeger. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Jeffrey I Cummings. Case assignment: Random assignment. (nsf, ) |
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 Northern 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.
