Tidwell v. Menard Correctional Center

Filing 4

ORDER re 1 MOTION to Perpetuate Testimony filed by Cleother Tidwell. Petitioner must serve respondent no later than May 22, 2015, or face dismissal without prejudice. Signed by Judge David R. Herndon on 5/12/15. (lmp)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

CLEOTHER TIDWELL,
Petitioner,
v.
MENARD CORRECTIONAL CENTER,
Respondent.

Case No. 14-MC-00092-DRH
ORDER

HERNDON, District Judge:
This matter is before the Court on petitioner Cleother Tidwell’s motion to
perpetuate testimony pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P 27 (Doc. 1). Upon receipt of
petitioner’s motion, the Court made attempts to recruit counsel through the
volunteer panel of pro bono attorneys in the Southern District of Illinois. An email
was sent to panel members laying out a brief description of Mr. Tidwell’s case,
while requesting a volunteer to marshal the service of process under Rule 27,
move for a hearing under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and if the Court grants relief, explore
if the inmate has means to pay for the desired deposition. If the pro bono attorney
found that Mr. Tidwell lacked sufficient means to pay for the deposition, the
Court also requested that the attorney front the cost and submit that expense to
the Court for reimbursement, while simultaneously moving to have the tape
described in Mr. Tidwell’s motion produced.

Page 1 of 2

After two failed attempts to recruit counsel for Mr. Tidwell through the
volunteer pro bono panel, the court remains unable to do so. At this time, the
Court advises Mr. Tidwell that it is incumbent upon him to serve the respondent
and proceed with his action to preserve evidence.
The Court's role is one of a neutral arbiter of disputes between parties, not
as an advocate on petitioner’s behalf. Because the court is an independent arbiter
rather than an advocate for the parties, it is unreasonable to expect the court to
serve on Mr. Tidwell’s behalf in an adversarial capacity. Therefore, if petitioner
does not serve the respondent by May 22, 2015, the Court will dismiss this case
without prejudice for failure to prosecute. If petitioner is unable to serve
respondent by the specified date, he may request an extension of time from the
Court, including an explanation as to why he needs additional time to complete
service.
Accordingly, Mr. Tidwell must serve respondent no later than May 22,
2015, or face dismissal without prejudice for failure to prosecute.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Signed this 12th day of May, 2015.

Digitally signed by
David R. Herndon
Date: 2015.05.12
13:29:06 -05'00'
United States District Judge

Page 2 of 2