Jackson v. State of Alabama Department of Corrections et al (MAG+)

Filing 5

ORDER denying 3 Motion for appointment of counsel, as further set out. Signed by Honorable Judge Susan Russ Walker on 1/21/14. (scn, )

Download PDF
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA NORTHERN DIVISION SABRINA C. JACKSON, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) STATE OF ALABAMA DEPARTMENT ) OF CORRECTIONS, et al., ) ) Defendant. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:14CV18-MHT (WO) ORDER This action is presently before the court on plaintiff’s motion for appointment of counsel (Doc. # 3). Plaintiff commenced the present action without the assistance of counsel and neither her complaint nor her motion for appointment of counsel give any indication that she is unable to represent herself. The facts underlying the plaintiff’s claims for relief are relatively simple and the law applicable to such claims is not complex. “The fact that a plaintiff would be helped by counsel is not sufficient to require appointment.” Rizo v. Alabama Department of Human Resources, 228 Fed. Appx. 832, 834 (11th Cir. 2007)(unpublished opinion). The court concludes that the circumstances of this case do not justify appointment of counsel. See Bass v. Perrin, 170 F.3d 1312, 1320 (11th Cir. 1999)(plaintiff in a civil case has no constitutional right to counsel and court should appoint counsel only in exceptional circumstances); see also Hunter v. Department of the Air Force, 846 F.2d 1314, 1317 (11th Cir. 1988); Wills v. Postmaster General, 300 Fed. Appx. 748, 750 n. 1 (11th Cir. 2008)(unpublished opinion)(subsequent history omitted); Cataldo v. St. James Episcopal School, 213 Fed. Appx. 966, 969 (11th Cir. 2007)(unpublished opinion). Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the motion for appointment of counsel (Doc. # 3) is DENIED. DONE, this 21st day of January, 2014. /s/ Susan Russ Walker SUSAN RUSS WALKER CHIEF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?