Wilson v. Legum Norman Midwest

Filing 7

MEMORANDUM Order issued sua sponte because of what appear to be some problematic aspects of plaintiff Wilson's action. (For further details see Memorandum Order) Signed by the Honorable Milton I. Shadur on 3/2/2015:Mailed notice(clw, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
EASTERN DIVISION

THOMAS WILSON,
Plaintiff,
v.
LEGUM NORMAN MIDWEST
33 West Ontario Street
Chicago, IL 60610,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 15 C 1638

MEMORANDUM ORDER
Thomas Wilson ("Wilson") has employed the Complaint of Employment Discrimination
form provided by the Clerk's Office for use by nonlawyers to sue his former employer
Associa/Legum & Norman, MidWest for asserted race-based and color-based discrimination. It
appears from the Complaint and its attached Charge of Discrimination and right-to-sue letter that
Wilson has complied with the statutory preconditions to suit. This memorandum order is instead
issued sua sponte because of what appear to be some problematic aspects of Wilson's action.
To begin with, Wilson has accompanied his Complaint with another Clerk's-Officesupplied form, a Motion for Attorney Representation ("Motion"). Because Wilson has paid the
$400 filing fee, this Court assumes that he saw no need to submit a Clerk's-Office-supplied In
Forma Pauperis Application ("Application") form, even though consideration of the Motion
necessitates a filled-out Application to establish a plaintiff's financial inability to bear the cost of
retained counsel. In addition, our Court of Appeals requires a specific showing of a party's
efforts to retain counsel on his or her own before a court can entertain such a motion, and in this

instance Wilson has failed to provide the necessary response to Motion ¶ 2. Accordingly this
Court cannot act on Wilson's Motion.
More substantively, Wilson has accompanied the Complaint and the other necessary
documents referred to earlier with a batch of e-mails over 1/4 inches thick, thus pleading
evidence in a federal system that is fundamentally based on notice pleading rather than the type
of evidence pleading permitted in the state court legal system. This Court has nonetheless waded
through many of those materials, and although this should not be misunderstood as an ultimate
substantive ruling on Wilson's action, it appears that his approach partakes more of "I was
terminated and I am an African American" than of the essential "I was terminated because I am
African-American." This Court will of course await developments in the litigation with that
distinction in mind. In the meantime it is contemporaneously issuing its customary scheduling
order in the case.

__________________________________________
Milton I. Shadur
Senior United States District Judge
Date: March 2, 2015

-2-