From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hammer v. Hamilton

United States District Court, Eastern District of Wisconsin
Sep 13, 2022
No. 21-CV-1183 (E.D. Wis. Sep. 13, 2022)

Opinion

21-CV-1183

09-13-2022

TROY G. HAMMER, Plaintiff, v. TODD HAMILTON, et al., Defendants.


ORDER

WILLIAM E. DUFFIN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

On September 9, 2022, Attorney James P. Scoptur, who the court had recruited as pro bono counsel, moved to withdraw from representation. (ECF No. 47.) He states that the full scope of the mediation representation was not provided before agreeing to be counsel and, as such, he does not have the time to adequately represent plaintiff Troy G. Hammer. The court will grant his motion.

Hammer also filed a second motion for clarification. (ECF No. 48.) It appears to be a duplicate of the motion the court decided on September 9, 2022 (ECF No. 46), so the court will deny it as moot. Hammer should take note that his mediation is once again stayed because Attorney Scoptur is no longer his lawyer. He should not contact Attorney Scoptur. The court will make efforts to recruit another attorney as efficiently as possible and will notify Hammer once an attorney has been found.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Attorney Scoptur's motion to withdraw as attorney (ECF No. 47) is GRANTED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Hammer's second motion to clarify (ECF No. 48) is DENIED as moot.


Summaries of

Hammer v. Hamilton

United States District Court, Eastern District of Wisconsin
Sep 13, 2022
No. 21-CV-1183 (E.D. Wis. Sep. 13, 2022)
Case details for

Hammer v. Hamilton

Case Details

Full title:TROY G. HAMMER, Plaintiff, v. TODD HAMILTON, et al., Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of Wisconsin

Date published: Sep 13, 2022

Citations

No. 21-CV-1183 (E.D. Wis. Sep. 13, 2022)