BUTLER v. POTTER

Filing 89

ORDER GRANTING 86 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response as to 73 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by GERALD BUTLER by 6/20/2011. Court will take matter under advisement the next day. Clerk directed to return file to undersigned by 6/21/2011. Plaintiff's 85 MOTION to Appoint Counsel is DENIED.(Internal deadline for referral to judge if response not filed earlier: 6/20/2011).). Signed by MAGISTRATE JUDGE GARY R JONES on 5/27/2011. (jws)

Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
GAINESVILLE DIVISION
GERALD BUTLER,
Plaintiff,
v.

CASE NO. 1:07-cv-22-SPM-GRJ

JOHN E. POTTER,
Defendant.
_____________________________/
ORDER
Pending before the Court are: (1) a motion entitled “Motion Plaintiff Is Seeking
Legal Counsel” (Doc. 85) and (2) Plaintiff’s Motion For Extension. (Doc. 86.) In the
Court’s Order, dated May 3, 2011, the Court directed Plaintiff to respond to the
Defendant’s pending motion for summary judgment by June 2, 2011. (Doc. 83.) Plaintiff
now requests an additional 30 days within which to respond to the motion for summary
judgment. Defendant opposes Plaintiff’s request for a 30 day extension because the
motion for summary judgment has been pending for more than 7 months. The Court
agrees that Plaintiff has had more than ample time to prepare and file a response tot he
motion for summary judgment. This case is more than four years old and therefore it is
necessary to move this case to resolution as expeditiously as possible. In view of the
fact that the response is due next week the Court will grant Plaintiff additional time to
file his response but not the full 30 days. Accordingly, Plaintiff shall file his response to
the motion for summary judgment no later than June 20, 2011. The Court will take the
motion for summary judgment under advisement the following day whether or not
Plaintiff files a response. Plaintiff is cautioned that the Court will not grant any further

Page 2 of 2

requests for extension of time absent extraordinary circumstances.
Plaintiff also filed a motion requesting the Court to appoint legal counsel to assist
him. As Defendant point out in his response the Court has denied Plaintiff’s previous
seven requests for the appointment of counsel. (Doc. 88.) For the reasons previously
expressed by the Court Plaintiff’s motion for the appointment of legal counsel is due to
be DENIED.
Accordingly, upon due consideration, it is ORDERED that:
1.

Plaintiff’s Motion For Extension (Doc. 86) is GRANTED to the limited
extent that Plaintiff shall have until June 20, 2011 to file his response to
Defendant’s motion for summary judgment. The Court will take this matter
under advisement the next day. The clerk is directed return the file to the
undersigned on June 21, 2011.

2.

Plaintiff’s Motion Seeking Legal Counsel (Doc. 85) is DENIED.

DONE AND ORDERED this 27th day of May 2011.

s/Gary R. Jones
GARY R. JONES
United States Magistrate Judge

Case No: 1:07-cv-22-SPM-GRJ