Carter, Johnson v. Unknown Heirs/Health Service Unit et al

Filing 75

ORDER that the clerk's office enter Richard Bolton, Evan B. Tenebruso and Kathryn Pfefferle of the law firm of Boardman & Clark as plaintiff's pro bono counsel of record and to set this case for a status conference in mid to late-November as the court's schedule allows. Signed by District Judge William M. Conley on 10/31/2018. (jef),(ps)

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

JOHNSON CARTER,
ORDER
Plaintiff,
v.
16-cv-252-wmc
CARLA GRIGGS,
Defendants.

Plaintiff Johnson Carter is proceeding in this civil action on Eighth Amendment and
Wisconsin negligence claims against defendant Carla Griggs for her alleged failure to treat
plaintiff’s collarbone and shoulder injury while he was incarcerated at Jackson Correctional
Institution. At plaintiff’s request, the court recruited counsel Richard Bolton, Evan Tenebruso
and Kathryn Pfefferle of the law firm of Boardman & Clark 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 date in this
case. Plaintiff’s counsel should contact the Marathon County Jail 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 the conference, the clerk’s office
will be directed to set that conference in mid to late-November as the court’s schedule allows.
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

take on.

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 attorney, as well as those working at her direction,
and must permit her 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 lawyer, he is
free to alert the court and end her representation, but he should be aware that it is highly
unlikely that the court will recruit a second set of attorneys to represent him.
ORDER
IT IS ORDERED that the clerk’s office enter Richard Bolton, Evan B. Tenebruso and
Kathryn Pfefferle of the law firm of Boardman & Clark as plaintiff’s pro bono counsel of record
and to set this case for a status conference in mid to late-November as the court’s schedule
allows.
Entered this 31st day of October, 2018.
BY THE COURT:
/s/
WILLIAM M. CONLEY
District Judge

2