Burgess, Edward v. Boughton, Gary et al

Filing 114

ORDER denying plaintiff Edward Burgess's motions for assistance in recruiting counsel, Dkt. 109 and Dkt. 111 without prejudice. Plaintiff's motion for an extension of the summary judgment briefing schedule, Dkt. 108 , is GRANTED in part. Plaintiff's response brief is due February 16, 2018. Defendants' reply is due February 26, 2018. Signed by District Judge James D. Peterson on 1/26/2018. (jef),(ps)

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

EDWARD BURGESS,
Plaintiff,
v.
GARY BOUGHTON, DANIEL WINKLESKI,
JOLINDA WATERMAN, TANYA BONSON,
SONYA ANDERSON, CARRIE SUTTER, ELLEN RAY,
JAMES LABELLE, EMILY DAVIDSON,
CATHY A. JESS, LEBBEUS BROWN,
REBECCA FELDMAN, BETH EDGE, and
JON E. LITSCHER,

ORDER
16-cv-846-jdp

Defendants.
Pro se plaintiff Edward Burgess is a prisoner in the custody of the Wisconsin
Department, currently housed at the Wisconsin Secure Program Facility (WSPF). Burgess filed
a complaint alleging that prison officials failed to provide adequate treatment for his plantar
fasciitis and bone spurs. I granted Burgess leave to proceed on Eighth Amendment deliberate
indifference claims, claims under the Rehabilitation Act, and state-law medical malpractice
claims. Dkt. 9 and Dkt. 42. Defendants have moved for summary judgment. See Dkt. 77; Dkt.
94; Dkt. 100. Burgess’s response brief was due on January 22, 2018. I previously denied
Burgess’s motion for assistance in recruiting counsel because he had not demonstrated that his
is one of those relatively few cases in which it appears from the record that the legal and factual
difficulty of the case exceeds the litigant’s demonstrated ability to prosecute it. Dkt. 107. He
asks me to reconsider that decision and to allow him additional time to respond to defendants’
summary judgment motions. Dkt. 108; Dkt. 109; Dkt. 111.

In support of his motions, Burgess says that he only has a ninth-grade education, has
severe learning disabilities, and no longer has help from other prisoners or access to the law
library because he has been confined to his room; he cannot respond to defendants’ voluminous
proposed findings of facts without a lawyer, especially because he does not have a writing desk
and writing on other surfaces hurts his back; and counsel is especially necessary in this case
because of complex medical issues and the need for an expert witness.
Health conditions and a lack of education are, unfortunately, common among prisoners
litigating in this court and are not alone reasons to recruit counsel. Without Burgess’s summary
judgment response, I cannot determine whether this case will present complex medical issues
that would benefit from expert review. So I will not assist Burgess in recruiting counsel now,
although he may renew his motion after he files his summary judgment response. I will allow
Burgess additional time to respond to defendants’ summary judgment motions, although not
the 60 days he requests.

ORDER
IT IS ORDERED that:
1. Plaintiff Edward Burgess’s motions for assistance in recruiting counsel, Dkt. 109
and Dkt. 111, are DENIED without prejudice.

2

2. Plaintiff’s motion for an extension of the summary judgment briefing schedule, Dkt.
108, is GRANTED in part. Plaintiff’s response brief is due February 16, 2018.
Defendants’ reply is due February 26, 2018.
Entered January 26, 2018.
BY THE COURT:
/s/
________________________________________
JAMES D. PETERSON
District Judge

3