Marquez Avila v. Contreras Gallegos

Filing 11

ORDER for appointment of counsel from the Pilot Program to Implement A Civil Pro Bono Panel by Judge Christine M. Arguello on 2/27/14. (dkals, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Judge Christine M. Arguello Civil Action No. 14-cv-00230-CMA-BNB IN RE THE APPLICATION OF RAQUEL FABIOLA MARQUEAVILA, Plaintiff, v. ROLANDO CONTRERA GALLEGOS, Defendant. APPOINTMENT ORDER In accordance with Part III.C. of the U.S. District Court’s Pilot Program to Implement A Civil Pro Bono Panel, the Court hereby determines that Defendant Rolando Contrera Gallegos 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; and 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 appointed counsel. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the Clerk shall select, notify, and appoint counsel to represent the pro se Defendant in this civil matter. The pro se Defendant is advised that the Clerk will select counsel from the Panel; however, there is no guarantee that Panel members will undertake representation in every case selected as part of the Pilot Program. This order does not guarantee that a pro bono attorney will ultimately appear for Defendant. Accordingly, the Court cautions that the Defendant is responsible for all scheduled matters, including hearings, depositions, motions and trial. DATED: February 27 , 2014 BY THE COURT: ________________________________ CHRISTINE M. ARGUELLO United States District 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?