Lancour, Shane v. City of LaCrosse PD et al
ORDER that the clerk's office enter Katelynn Williams and William Parsonsof the law firm of Hawks Quindel as plaintiff's pro bono counsel of record and to set this case for a status conference in July 2017, as the court's schedule allows. Signed by District Judge William M. Conley on 6/29/2017. (jef),(ps)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
Plaintiff Shane Lancour filed this civil action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging
that defendant Heath Parshall, a police officer with the La Crosse Police Department, used
excessive force again him in violation of the Fourth Amendment. At plaintiff’s request, the
court recruited counsel Katelynn Williams and William Parsons of the law firm of Hawks
Quindel in Madison, Wisconsin, to represent him pro bono for the remainder of this civil action.
See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1) (“The court may request an attorney to represent any person unable
to afford counsel.”); Pruitt v. Mote, 503 F.3d 647, 653-54 (7th Cir. 2007) (en banc) (noting
that § 1915(e)(1) confers, at most, discretion “to recruit a lawyer to represent an indigent civil
litigant pro bono publico”). Accordingly, the court will enter their appearance as plaintiff’s pro
bono counsel for the record.
The next step is for the court to hold a status conference to reset the trial calendar in
this case. Plaintiff’s counsel should contact the Wisconsin Department of Corrections for
purposes of consulting with plaintiff in the preparation of his case whether by phone and/or in
person. So that counsel will have sufficient time to consult with plaintiff in advance of a
preliminary pretrial conference, the clerk’s office will be directed to set that conference in July
2017, as the court’s schedule allows. Both sides at one point have indicated an interest in
mediation, that point may be raised at the status conference.
Finally, plaintiff should appreciate that his counsel took on this representation out of a
sense of professional responsibility, which includes representing zealously those clients they
Now that he is represented by counsel, plaintiff is advised that in return for
representation plaintiff, too, has taken on a responsibility.
For example, all future
communications with the court must be through his attorney of record. Plaintiff must also
work directly and cooperatively with his attorneys, as well as those working at their direction,
and must permit them to exercise their professional judgment to determine which matters are
appropriate to bring to the court’s attention and in what form. Plaintiff does not have the
right to require counsel to raise frivolous arguments or to follow every directive he makes. On
the contrary, plaintiff should expect his counsel to tell him what he needs to hear, rather than
what he might prefer to hear, and understand that the rules of professional conduct may
preclude counsel from taking certain actions or permitting plaintiff from doing so.
If plaintiff decides at some point that he does not wish to work with his lawyers, he is
free to alert the court and end their representation, but he should be aware that it is highly
unlikely that the court will recruit a second set of attorneys to represent him.
IT IS ORDERED that the clerk’s office enter Katelynn Williams and William Parsons
of the law firm of Hawks Quindel as plaintiff’s pro bono counsel of record and to set this case
for a status conference in July 2017, as the court’s schedule allows.
Entered this 29th day of June, 2017.
BY THE COURT:
WILLIAM M. CONLEY
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?