Peters, Thomas v. Revels, Wesley et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
THOMAS ZACHARY PETERS,
Plaintiff, OPINION AND ORDER
v.
23-cv-232-wmc
CAPT. STAN HENDRICKSON,
LT. RYAN HALLMAN, and
SGT. JEFF SCHWANZ,
Defendants.
Plaintiff Thomas Zachary Peters, a state prisoner who is representing himself, filed
a complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that Monroe County Jail officers Jeff
Schwanz, Ryan Hallman, and Stan Hendrickson violated his civil rights. (Dkt. #26.) The
parties’ motions for summary judgment are currently under advisement. (Dkt. #54 and
Dkt. #65.) Plaintiff also moved for assistance in recruiting counsel, to extend the deadline
for discovery or stay all pending deadlines, to compel discovery from a non-party witness,
and to compel production of deposition transcripts. (Dkts. ##96, 100, 101, 110.) The
court discusses each of plaintiff’s motions in turn.
A. Motion for Assistance Recruiting Counsel
Plaintiff moved for assistance recruiting counsel, citing the nature and complexity
of his case. (Dkt. ##96-99.) He also asserts that his ongoing medical issues would impede
his ability to represent himself since he is under monitoring for syncope and its associated
symptoms of dizziness, fainting, headache, and vomiting. (Dkt. ##96-99, 109.) In
support of this motion, plaintiff further notified the court that he is scheduled for hernia
Case: 3:23-cv-00232-wmc Document #: 113 Filed: 12/04/25 Page 1 of 4

2
surgery on January 20, 2026, the current trial date in this case. (Dkt. #109.) For good
cause, the court will grant plaintiff’s motion for assistance in recruiting counsel, should
some part or all of his claims survive defendants’ summary judgment motion. See Thomas
v. Wardell, 951 F.3d 854, 860 (7th Cir. 2020).
Nonetheless, litigants in civil cases do not have a constitutional right to counsel,
and the court can only assist in recruiting counsel who is willing to serve voluntarily. See
28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1); Pruitt v. Mote, 503 F.3d 647, 654, 656 (7th Cir. 2007) (en banc).
Thus, the court cannot guarantee that its efforts to recruit counsel will be successful or that
plaintiff may not ultimately be required to proceed in this case pro se.
A. Motion for Extension of Time or Motion to Stay All upcoming Deadlines
Plaintiff also moves to extend the close of discovery, or in the alternative, to stay all
pending case deadlines. (Dkt. #100.) Because plaintiff does not demonstrate a specific
need for additional discovery, and instead states that he has already sent the interrogatories
and requests for production that he desired, the court will deny this part of the motion.
Because the court will grant plaintiff’s motion for assistance recruiting counsel and
plaintiff is scheduled for surgery on the current trial date, however, the court will also grant
plaintiff’s motion in part and strike all upcoming pre-trial deadlines and the trial date. The
court will notify the parties if it is successful in recruiting counsel for plaintiff, and at that
time, the court will set a scheduling hearing for the remainder of the case.
B. Motion to Compel a Non-party Witness
Plaintiff next moves to compel discovery from a non-party witness, his former
Case: 3:23-cv-00232-wmc Document #: 113 Filed: 12/04/25 Page 2 of 4

3
criminal defense attorney, Bernardo Cueto. (Dkt. #101.) Plaintiff claims that Cueto, and
his former criminal investigator, “Diane Doe,” have documents and photographs which
relate to his claims. Plaintiff does not provide specific facts showing how any of the sought-
after evidence relates to his claims of harassment and retaliation. Plaintiff also does not
comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45, which governs subpoenas and provides
protections for nonparties by requiring the party responsible for issuing and serving a
subpoena to take “reasonable steps” to avoid imposing “undue burden” and expense on
nonparties. Therefore, plaintiff’s motion to compel will be denied.
C. Motion to Compel Production of Deposition Transcripts
Finally, plaintiff moves to compel production of deposition transcripts from
defendants regarding depositions taken in the last two weeks. (Dkt. #110.) Since plaintiff
candidly states that the defendants have not yet had an opportunity to comply with his
request, and defendants are entitled to an opportunity to respond before responding to a
motion to compel, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 37, plaintiff’s motion to compel will be denied as
well.
ORDER
IT IS ORDERED that:
1) Plaintiff’s motion for assistance in recruiting counsel (dkt. #96) is GRANTED.
2) Plaintiff’s motion to extend deadlines for discovery or stay all deadlines (dkt.
#100) is DENIED IN PART and GRANTED IN PART as set forth above.
a. The cutoff for discovery REMAINS Friday, December 5, 2025.
b. The remaining pretrial deadlines and the trial date are STRUCK.
Case: 3:23-cv-00232-wmc Document #: 113 Filed: 12/04/25 Page 3 of 4

4
3) Plaintiff’s motion to compel testimony from a non-party witness (dkt. #101) is
DENIED.
4) Plaintiff’s motion to compel production of documents (dkt. #110) is DENIED.
Entered this 4th day of December, 2025.
BY THE COURT:
/s/
__________________________________
WILLIAM M. CONLEY
District Judge
Case: 3:23-cv-00232-wmc Document #: 113 Filed: 12/04/25 Page 4 of 4