Ajala, Mustafa-El v. U.W. Hospital and Clinics et al

Filing 58

ORDER that the stay in this case is LIFTED. Plaintiff Mustafa-El Ajala may have until October 1, 2018, to inform the court in writing whether he wishes to: (1) continue litigating the case but without counsel; or (2) dismiss the case without pre judice. If plaintiff chooses the first option, the clerk of court will set a telephone scheduling conference with Magistrate Judge Crocker. If plaintiff fails to respond by October 1, 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. Plaintiff's motion for an order requiring alternative dispute resolution, dkt. # 56 , is DENIED. Signed by District Judge Barbara B. Crabb on 9/17/2018. (jef),(ps)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - MUSTAFA-EL K.A. AJALA,
formerly known as DENNIS E. JONES-EL,
ORDER
Plaintiff,
16-cv-639-bbc
v.
UW HOSPITAL AND CLINICS,
SUTCHIN PATEL, BURTON COX,
and SRIHARAN SIVALINGAM,
Defendants.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Pro se plaintiff and prisoner Mustafa-El Ajala is proceeding on claims that health care
staff at the Wisconsin Secure Program Facility and the University of Wisconsin Hospital and
Clinics failed to provide plaintiff adequate treatment for his hypercalcemia and
hyperparathyroidism, in violation of both the Eighth Amendment and state law. The case
has been stayed for more than a year while the court attempted to find counsel for plaintiff.
Dkt. #53. During this time, the court has contacted members of the Western District of
Wisconsin Bar Association and the Seventh Circuit Bar Association on numerous occasions
to seek assistance for plaintiff.
Unfortunately, no lawyer has agreed to take the case and the court has exhausted its
options. In April 2018, plaintiff was transferred to a prison in Virginia, making it even less
likely that counsel in Wisconsin will be willing to represent him on a pro bono basis. Thus,
plaintiff now has a choice: (1) proceed on his own without counsel; or (2) dismiss this case

1

without prejudice.
If plaintiff 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 plaintiff to determine how to litigate his claim. The court cannot
provide legal advice.
If plaintiff chooses to dismiss the case, the dismissal will be without prejudice, which
means that plaintiff 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.”).
Finally, plaintiff has filed a motion requesting the court to order defendants to engage
in alternative dispute resolution. He states that because of he is out of state, he will have
difficulty obtaining the discovery he needs and gaining access to Wisconsin law. Plaintiff
raises valid concerns, but I will not order defendants to engage in mediation or other
alternative dispute resolution at this time. Although parties are always encouraged to
consider mediation and settlement, this court does not generally require parties to engage
in mediation. This is particularly true where only one party has expressed an interest in
mediation. Plaintiff should work with defendants’ counsel to obtain the discovery and legal
materials he needs. If he cannot obtain what he needs after communicating with counsel,
he should contact the court for assistance.

2

ORDER
IT IS ORDERED that
1. The stay in this case is LIFTED.
2. Plaintiff Mustafa-El Ajala may have until October 1, 2018, 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 plaintiff chooses the first option, the clerk of court will set a telephone

scheduling conference with Magistrate Judge Crocker. If plaintiff fails to respond by October
1, 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.
4. Plaintiff’s motion for an order requiring alternative dispute resolution, dkt. #56,
is DENIED.
Entered this 17th day of September 2018.
BY THE COURT:
/s/
__________________________________
BARBARA B. CRABB
District Judge

3