IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION
October 21, 2011
STEVEN CURRY #R-09761, PLAINTIFF,
CORRECTIONAL OFFICER WEATHERSBY, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Milton I. Shadur Senior United States District Judge
On September 9, 2011 this Court issued its brief memorandum order in this action originally brought pro se by inmate plaintiff Steven Curry ("Curry"). That order began with the required determination called for by 28 U.S.C. §1915 as to Curry's payment of the $350 filing fee in future installments, and it then granted Curry's previously deferred motion for appointment of pro bono publico counsel to represent him.
Now Curry has submitted a hand-printed Motion To Amend on the basis that he had originally attributed a mistaken name to one of the officers to whom the Complaint had referred. But Curry has to understand that once a lawyer has been appointed to represent a pro se client, as Curry himself had requested, it is improper for the client to take in-court action on his own--that is counsel's job and counsel's job alone.
Accordingly Curry's current submission is stricken. If he wishes to take any court action, whether by amending the Complaint or in any other respect, he must instead communicate with his appointed lawyer on the subject.
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.