Keys v. Starbucks

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN

LOUIS C. KEYS,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 24-CV-500

STARBUCKS,

Defendant.

DECISION AND ORDER

Louis C. Keys, an inmate of the Hennepin County Public Safety Facility, alleges he was denied service at a Starbucks in Oshkosh, Wisconsin, because of his race. On January 2, 2025, the court denied his “Motion for Appointment of Counsel.” (ECF No. 35.) He now asks the court to reconsider its decision. (ECF No. 37.) Keys states that he has no means to investigate prospective attorneys while incarcerated in the Hennepin County Jail. Nor does he have access to legal materials. He asserts that the jail lacks a law library or a single legal book. Even if the court were to accept as true Keys’s assertions that the Hennepin County Jail fails to provide inmates resources sufficient to provide them meaningful access to courts, cf. Bounds v. Smith, 430 U.S. 817, 823, 97 S. Ct. 1491, 1495, 52 L.Ed.2d 72, 80 (1977), Keys has nonetheless failed to show that recruitment of counsel is appropriate at this point. Keys has demonstrated an adequate understanding of the general principles at issue such that he was able to adequately state a plausible cause of action. The case is

now in the discovery phase where each side learns about the facts underlying the case. It is a phase that is governed by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. In a simple case such as this, a party should need nothing more to be able to adequately represent himself. Therefore, along with this order the Clerk shall provide Keys with a copy of both the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and this court’s Local Rules. The court reiterates that its pool of volunteer lawyers is very small. The number of litigants who seek and would benefit from counsel is many times greater than the number of local attorneys willing to work for free. As such, Keys must employ all available means, which may include calling on a friend or family member, to attempt to identify attorneys who may be willing to represent him. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the plaintiff's Motion to Reconsider (ECF No. 37) is denied. Along with this order the Clerk shall provide Keys with copies of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the court’s Local Rules. Dated at Milwaukee, Wisconsin this 24th day of January, 2025.

Oe EY: WILLIAM E. DUFFI US. Magistrate Judge