Russell v. John Doe et al

Filing 36

MEMORANDUM Order. Signed by the Honorable Milton I. Shadur on 5/24/2017:Mailed notice(clw, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION MIKE D. RUSSELL, Plaintiff, v. KITCHEN SUPERVISOR BRUCE JOHN DOE, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 16 C 5950 MEMORANDUM ORDER This action, filed pro se by prisoner plaintiff Mike Russell ("Russell") and originally assigned to the calendar of this Court's late friend and colleague Honorable John Darrah, came to this Court's calendar via random assignment during Judge Darrah's terminal illness. This Court promptly printed out the case docket and found that the action had been dormant for some time, so it promptly issued a brief March 24, 2017 memorandum order that set an April 10 status hearing date and directed that arrangements be made for Russell to participate telephonically. Quite early in the case's pendency before Judge Darrah he had denied Russell's motion for attorney representation without prejudice, and during the April 10 status hearing this Court reinforced the need for Russell to reapply. On May 12 Russell filed a renewed Motion for Attorney Representation ("Motion"), using the Clerk's-Office-supplied form of that motion, 1 that effectively addressed the flaw that had triggered Judge Darrah's denial of Russell's original 1 On May 3 the Clerk's Office had received a four-page hand-printed Motion for Appointment of Counsel from Russell, but no copy of that filing was provided to this Court. Because the May 12 filing referred to in the text has superseded that earlier submission and has done the job for Russell, the May 3 filing [Dkt. No. 33] is simply denied as moot. Motion: his failure to identify his own efforts to seek out counsel, a requirement imposed by our Court of Appeals as a precondition to consideration of such a motion. Because the May 12 Motion has suitably addressed the Court of Appeals' requirement, this Court grants that motion and has obtained the name of this member of the District Court trial bar to represent Russell: Alan J. Martin, Esq. Law Offices of Alan J. Martin, LLC 120 North LaSalle Street, 20th Floor Chicago, Illinois 60602 Telephone: 312-606-8710 Email: This Court sets a status hearing for 9 a.m. July 11, 2017, with the above-designated counsel being expected in the interim (1) to confer with Russell, (2) to make arrangements for service of process on defendants by the United States Marshals Service and to consider whether (3) to leave Russell's Complaint in place or, perhaps, (4) to consider whether a lawyer-prepared replacement pleading will better serve Russell's interests. 2 __________________________________________ Milton I. Shadur Senior United States District Judge Date: May 24, 2017 2 If the latter alternative applies, attorney Martin should communicate with the counsel who are already representing defendants and advise them that no responsive pleading to Russell's self-prepared version of the Complaint should currently be prepared and filed. -2-

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.

Why Is My Information Online?