Cooper, Demetrius v. Meyer et al

Filing 208

ORDER adding attorneys for plaintiff to the cases for the purpose of mediation. Signed by District Judge James D. Peterson on 6/20/2018. (jef),(ps)

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

DEMETRIUS COOPER,
Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER

JEFFREY MEYER, PATRICK GORMAN, and
CORY SABISH,

16-cv-526-jdp

Defendants.
DEMETRIUS L. COOPER,
Plaintiff,
v.
ALLISON McGOWAN, KHRYSTYNA
ROSENAU,
PATRICK GORMAN, MICHAEL BRITTEN,
NATHAN SANCHEZ, TERANCE LASH, and
KYLE TRITT,

ORDER
17-cv-383-jdp

Defendants.
Pro se plaintiff Demetrius Cooper, a prisoner incarcerated at the Wisconsin Secure
Program Facility, is proceeding on claims under the First and Eighth Amendments against
defendants, officials at the Waupun Correctional Institution, in two related cases. On June 1,
2018, I granted Cooper’s motion for assistance in recruiting counsel to represent him for the
purpose of mediating both cases, and I stayed the proceedings in Cooper v. McGowan, No. 17cv-383. Dkt. 205 in the ’526 case and Dkt. 97 in the ’383 case.
The court has now located counsel. Attorneys Naikang Tsao, Megan R. Stelljes, and
Katelynn M. Williams of the law firm Foley & Lardner LLP have agreed to represent Cooper

in both cases for the purposes of mediation only, with the understanding that the firm will
serve with no guarantee of compensation for its services. It is the court’s intention that the
scope of representation extends to mediation only, although counsel may extend the scope of
representation at their discretion.
Cooper should understand that because he is now represented in this case, he may not
communicate directly with the court from this point forward. He must work directly with his
lawyers 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. Cooper does not
have the right to require counsel to raise frivolous arguments or to follow every directive he
makes. He should be prepared to accept the strategic decisions made by his lawyers even if he
disagrees with some of them. If Cooper decides at some point not to work with these lawyers,
he is free to end the representation, but he should be aware that it is unlikely that the court
will recruit another lawyer to represent him.
A few final notes on case management. I expect the parties to schedule mediation
promptly. The 30-day stay imposed in the ’383 case remains in place. Should the parties which
to extend the stay, they must submit a report on mediation, as I explained in my June 1 order.
Dkt. 97 in the ’383 case. The July 30 trial date for the ’526 case remains on the calendar.
Entered June 20, 2018.
BY THE COURT:
/s/
________________________________________
JAMES D. PETERSON
District Judge

2