Margheim v. Buck et al
ORDER that the Clerk of the Court shall select, notify, and appoint a member of the Panel to represent the pro se litigant in this matter, by Judge William J. Martinez on 5/29/2014. (evana, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Judge William J. Martínez
Civil Action No. 12-cv-1520-WJM-CBS
EMELA BULJKO, D.D.A.,
In accordance with Part III.C. of the U.S. District Court’s Pilot Program to
Implement a Civil Pro Bono Panel, and based on the reasons articulated in the Court’s
Order vacating the Final Judgment and reopening this action (ECF No. 57), the Court
hereby determines that pro se Plaintiff Terry Margheim merits appointment of counsel
drawn from the Civil Pro Bono Panel. The Court is satisfied that the following factors
and considerations have been met:
1) the nature and complexity of the action;
2) the potential merit of the pro se party’s claims;
3) the demonstrated inability of the pro se party to retain counsel by other means;
4) the degree to which the interests of justice will be served by appointment of
counsel, including the benefit the Court may derive from the assistance of the
See Pilot Program to Implement a Civil Pro Bono Panel, Part III.B.1.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall select, notify, and
appoint a member of the Panel to represent the pro se litigant in this matter. The pro
se litigant is advised that there is no guarantee that Panel members will undertake
representation in every case selected as part of the Pilot Program. The pro se litigant is
further cautioned that, until appointed counsel enters an appearance, the litigant will
continue to be responsible for all scheduled matters and deadlines, including hearings,
depositions, motions, and trial, and must follow the Court’s procedures and rules
Dated this 29th day of May, 2014.
BY THE COURT:
William J. Martínez
United States 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?