Waloway v. Meisner et al

Filing 10

ORDER signed by Judge Rudolph T. Randa on 9/10/2015. 9 Plaintiff's MOTION seeking return of documents GRANTED; Exhibits (See ECF No. 8) WITHDRAWN and STRICKEN from record. Plaintiff may file amended complaint within 45 days. 8 Plaintiff's request to appoint counsel DENIED without prejudice. (cc: all counsel, via mail to Jason Waloway-with exhibits, § 1983 civil rights complaint form, Answers to Prisoner Litigant's Common Questions)(cb)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
JASON A. WALOWAY,
Plaintiff,
-vs-

Case No. 15-CV-755

MICHAEL MEISNER, et al.,
Defendants.

DECISION AND ORDER
Jason A. Waloway, a former inmate, filed an action under 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983, alleging that his civil rights were violated. On July 31, 2015, the
Court screened the plaintiff’s complaint and decided that he had failed to
state a claim.

The Court gave the plaintiff the option of curing the

deficiencies the Court identified and filing an amended complaint by
September 3, 2015.

The plaintiff did not file an amended complaint;

instead, on August 31, 2015, the plaintiff filed a letter along with a box of
exhibits containing more than 500 pages of documents.

The plaintiff

explained in his letter that he was providing the Court with “all of [his]
medical records and complaints to show negligence of D.O.C. and D.O.C.
employees.” (ECF No. 8.) The plaintiff also asked the Court to appoint an
attorney to represent him because he is unfamiliar with how to litigate a
case. The plaintiff filed a second letter on August 31, 2015, asking the

Court to send the documents back to him after the Court finished with the
documents. (ECF No. 9.)
Although the plaintiff failed to file an amended complaint by the
September 3 deadline, it is clear that the plaintiff desires to continue with
this lawsuit but is confused about how to do so. Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 8 requires a plaintiff, in part, to set forth a short and plain
statement of his claim showing that he is entitled to relief. Apparently,
the plaintiff hoped that the Court could assist him in this task by
analyzing the plaintiff’s medical documents and inmate complaints, but it
is not the job of the Court to identify the plaintiff’s claims; he must do that
himself. As such, the Court has no need for the documents the plaintiff
has filed, and will grant the plaintiff’s request to have the documents
returned to him.
In addition, the Court will give the plaintiff an additional forty-five
days from the entry of this order to file an amended complaint. The
Court encourages the plaintiff to review its July 31 order, which sets forth
the pleading standards for stating a claim. Also, along with this order, the
-2-

clerk’s office will send the plaintiff a helpful guide for pro se plaintiffs as
well as a blank civil rights complaint form that the plaintiff should use
when preparing his amended complaint.
Finally, the plaintiff has asked that the Court to appoint counsel to
represent him. In a civil case, the Court has discretion to decide whether
to recruit a lawyer for someone who cannot afford one. Navejar v. Iyola,
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). Before a court
makes that decision, though, a plaintiff has to show the court that he has
made a reasonable effort to hire private counsel on his own. Pruitt v.
Mote, 503 F.3d 647, 653 (7th Cir. 2007). Only after a plaintiff shows that
he’s made that reasonable attempt to hire counsel will a court decide
“whether the difficulty of the case – factually and legally – exceeds the
particular plaintiff’s capacity as a layperson to coherently present it.”
Navejar, 718 F.3d at 696 (citing Pruitt, 503 F.3d at 655). To decide that, a
court looks, not only at the plaintiff’s ability to try his case, but also at his
ability to perform other “tasks that normally attend litigation,” such as
-3-

“evidence gathering” and “preparing and responding to motions.” Id.
In this case, the plaintiff states that he has contacted several
attorneys, but no one wants to take his case.

Although the plaintiff

satisfies the first step in the process described above, the Court will deny
the plaintiff’s request. At this time, all the plaintiff has to do is provide an
amended complaint briefly stating what happened to him and what relief
he would like the Court to provide. The plaintiff’s filings to date indicate
he is capable of doing that on his own. Accordingly, the Court will deny
the plaintiff’s request for assistance of counsel at this time.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the plaintiff’s motion
seeking the return of documents (ECF No. 9) is GRANTED.

The

documents filed by the plaintiff on August 31, 2015 (see ECF No. 8) are
WITHDRAWN and STRICKEN from the record.
IT IS ALSO ORDERED THAT that within forty-five days of this
order, the plaintiff shall file, if he so chooses, an amended complaint.

-4-

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT the plaintiff’s request for the
appointment

of

counsel

(ECF

No.

8)

is

DENIED

WITHOUT

PREJUDICE.
IT IS ALSO ORDERED THAT the clerk’s office shall send to the
plaintiff a blank civil rights complaint form for prisoners and the brochure
Answers to Prisoner Litigants’ Common Questions.
Dated at Milwaukee, Wisconsin, this 10th day of September, 2015.
BY THE COURT:

__________________________
HON. RUDOLPH T. RANDA
U.S. District Judge

-5-