Peterson, Erick v. Meisner, Michael et al

Filing 125

ORDER that the stay in this case is LIFTED. Plaintiff Erick Peterson may have until September 23, 2019, to inform the court in writing whether he wishes to: (1) continue litigating the case but without counsel or (2) dismiss the case without preju dice. If Peterson chooses the first option, the clerk of court will set a telephone scheduling conference with Magistrate Judge Crocker. If Peterson fails to respond by September 23, I will construe his silence to mean that he is choosing the second option and I will direct the clerk of court to close the case. Signed by District Judge James D. Peterson on 9/9/2019. (jef),(ps)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN

ERICK PETERSON,
Plaintiff,
v.
ORDER
TIMOTHY CASIANA, TRACY KOPFHAMER,
BENJAMIN NEUMAIER, SCOTT ROYCE,
TRAVIS HAAG, DALIA SULIENE,
and MELISSA THORNE,

15-cv-49-jdp

Defendants.
This case has been stayed for more than a year while the court attempted to find counsel
for plaintiff Erick Peterson. See Dkt. 123. During this time, the court has: (1) twice contacted
20 of the biggest law firms that practice in this court; (2) twice contacted the members of the
Western District of Wisconsin Bar Association and; (3) contacted the members of the Seventh
Circuit Bar Association. Unfortunately, no lawyer has agreed to take the case and the court has
exhausted its options. Thus, Peterson now has a choice: (1) proceed on his own without
counsel; or (2) dismiss this case without prejudice.
If Peterson chooses the first option, I will direct the clerk of court to set a telephone
conference with Magistrate Judge Stephen Crocker to determine a new schedule for the case.
After that, it will be up to Peterson to determine how to litigate his claim. The court cannot
provide legal advice.
If Peterson chooses to dismiss the case, the dismissal will be without prejudice, which
means that Peterson could file a new case at a later date. However, the statute of limitations
would continue to run. Dupuy v. McEwen, 495 F.3d 807, 810 (7th Cir. 2007) (“[W]hen a suit

is dismissed without prejudice, the statute of limitations continues to run from the date
(normally the date of the injury) on which the claim accrued.”).

ORDER
IT IS ORDERED that:
1. The stay in this case is LIFTED.
2. Plaintiff Erick Peterson may have until September 23, 2019, to inform the court in
writing whether he wishes to: (1) continue litigating the case but without counsel or
(2) dismiss the case without prejudice.
3. If Peterson chooses the first option, the clerk of court will set a telephone scheduling
conference with Magistrate Judge Crocker. If Peterson fails to respond by September
23, I will construe his silence to mean that he is choosing the second option and I
will direct the clerk of court to close the case.
Entered September 9, 2019.
BY THE COURT:
/s/
________________________________________
JAMES D. PETERSON
District Judge

2