Lindsey v. Hollenbeck et al
ORDER affirming 19 Order of the Magistrate denying Mr. Lindsey's motion 5 and 16 . Signed by Honorable P. K. Holmes, III on January 13, 2014. (lw)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
FORT SMITH DIVISION
Case No. 2:13-CV-02192
SHERIFF WILLIAM HOLLENBECK, Sebastian County,
Arkansas; JAIL ADMINISTRATOR JOHN DEVANE;
MEDICAL ADMIN. PAM CARNELL; ASST. MEDICAL
ADMIN. KATHY JONES; INMATE MANAGEMENT
JOHN MILLER; DIRECTOR OF NURSES CINDY
MOORE; and NURSE CHERYL MAKINSON, all in their
official and individual capacities
Currently before the Court is Plaintiff Joseph Lindsey’s motion (Doc. 25) to review the
Magistrate’s order (Doc. 19) denying Mr. Lindsey’s motions (Docs. 5 and 16) to appoint counsel.
Having reviewed the Magistrate’s order and Mr. Lindsey’s objections, the Court cannot find
that the Magistrate’s order was clearly erroneous or contrary to law. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a). As stated
by the Magistrate, the facts and claims involved in this matter do not appear to be so complex that
Mr. Lindsey will be unable to effectively represent himself. Mr. Lindsey has, in fact, adequately
represented himself thus far in the litigation. The Court also notes that Mr. Lindsey has filed another
motion to appoint counsel, which is currently pending before the Magistrate. The Magistrate is free
to re-evaluate appointment of counsel as this litigation progresses in light of any changes in
circumstance. In the event his current motion is denied, Mr. Lindsey should avoid filing future
motions for appointment of counsel unless he can note a material change in circumstance that would
warrant reconsideration by the Magistrate.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the order (Doc. 19) of the Magistrate denying Mr.
Lindsey’s motions (Docs. 5 and 16) to appoint counsel is AFFIRMED.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 13th day of January, 2014.
/s/P. K. Holmes, III
P.K. HOLMES, III
CHIEF U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE
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?