Olive v. Schuler

Full title: ANTHONY OLIVE, Inmate #B-45286, Plaintiff, v. H. SCHULER, et al.…

Court: United States District Court, S.D. Illinois

Date published: Oct 20, 2006

Civil No. 06-729-JPG (S.D. Ill. Oct. 20, 2006)

Opinion

Civil No. 06-729-JPG.

October 20, 2006

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

J. GILBERT, District Judge

In a separate order, the Court granted Plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis. Several other motions remain pending in this action.

MOTION FOR PROPOSED SETTLEMENT (DOC. 3)

In this motion, Plaintiff offers to dismiss this action in its entirety if Defendants will present their "reliable source" for a polygraph examination. Such a motion for settlement is premature, as the Court has yet to complete its review of the complaint. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Accordingly, this motion is DENIED without prejudice.

MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION (DOC. 4)

In considering whether to grant injunctive relief, a district court is obligated to weigh the relative strengths and weaknesses of a plaintiff's claims in light of a five-part test that has long been part of the Seventh Circuit's jurisprudence. Specifically, a plaintiff must establish: (1) that there is a reasonable or substantial likelihood that he would succeed on the merits; (2) that there is no adequate remedy at law; (3) that absent an injunction, he will suffer irreparable harm; (4) that the irreparable harm suffered by plaintiff in the absence of the injunctive relief will outweigh the irreparable harm that defendants will endure were the injunction granted; and (5) that the public interest would be served by an injunction. Teamsters Local Unions Nos. 75 and 200 v. Barry Trucking, 176 F.3d 1004, 1011 (7^th Cir. 1999).

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of Plaintiff's claims for relief in his complaint, the Court is of the opinion that a preliminary injunction is not warranted at this time. Therefore, this motion is DENIED. MOTION TO APPOINT COUNSEL (DOC. 7)

When deciding whether to appoint counsel, the Court must first determine if a pro se litigant has made reasonable efforts to secure counsel before resorting to the courts. Jackson v. County of McLean, 953 F.2d 1070, 1072 (7^th Cir. 1992). Plaintiff makes no showing that he has attempted to retain counsel. Therefore, the Court finds that appointment of counsel is not warranted at this time. Accordingly, Plaintiff's motion for appointment of counsel is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.