Datto v. Florida International University Board of Trustees et al

Filing 53

ORDER Denying 52 Motion to Appoint Counsel. Signed by Judge Beth Bloom on 7/30/2020. See attached document for full details. (jbs)

Download PDF
Case 1:20-cv-20360-BB Document 53 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/30/2020 Page 1 of 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 1:20-cv-20360-BLOOM/Louis JEFFREY PETER DATTO, PH.D., Plaintiff, v. FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY BOARD OF TRUSTEES, et al., Defendants. ________________________________/ ORDER THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon pro se Plaintiff’s Motion to Be Appointed Counsel, ECF No. [52] (“Motion”). The Court has reviewed the Motion, the record in this case, the applicable law, and is otherwise fully advised. A litigant has no constitutional right to counsel in a civil case, and the decision to appoint counsel is in the court’s discretion. See Suggs v. United States, 199 F. App’x 804, 807 (11th Cir. 2006). Counsel should only be appointed in “exceptional circumstances.” Id. (citing Dean v. Barber, 951 F.2d 1210, 1216 (11th Cir. 1992)). “‘The key is whether the pro se litigant needs help in presenting the essential merits of his or her position to the court.’” Id. (quoting Kilgo v. Ricks, 983 F.2d 189, 193 (11th Cir. 1993)). Here, the factual circumstances and issues raised in the Complaint, ECF No. [1], do not rise to the level of “exceptional circumstances.” Indeed, Plaintiff asserts that the Complaint “may not be considered novel or complex[.]” ECF No. [52] at 1. Further, he does not demonstrate that his potential amended claims that he intends to assert (that are only briefly described) merit the appointment of counsel. To be clear, Plaintiff represents that he is “capable of adequately Case 1:20-cv-20360-BB Document 53 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/30/2020 Page 2 of 3 Case No. 1:20-cv-20360-BLOOM/Louis presenting his case,” and the Court notes that since this lawsuit was filed, Plaintiff has filed motions, responded to a dispositive motion and a motion to stay, represented himself in a discovery hearing, and demonstrated familiarity with the law. He has also litigated other matters with other courts each without the assistance of counsel. Although a civil rights plaintiff would generally prefer to be represented by counsel, such desire does not satisfy the standard necessary for appointment. The Court is also unconvinced that appointing counsel is warranted in light of Plaintiff’s representation that he “does not want an attorney representing him for the entire matter because he wants to prove that he has the capabilities to think critically and to quickly and appropriately react under pressure while displaying the professionalism needed in the handling of this case because there are important attributes for a person to have to be successful as both a lawyer and a doctor.” Id. at 5. Plaintiff’s desire to prove his capabilities is commendable, but it does not amount to an exceptional circumstance justifying the relief he requests. Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Motion, ECF No. [52], is DENIED. DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, on July 30, 2020. _________________________________ BETH BLOOM UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Copies to: Counsel of Record Jeffrey Peter Datto, Ph.D. 3352 W. 98th Place 2 Case 1:20-cv-20360-BB Document 53 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/30/2020 Page 3 of 3 Case No. 1:20-cv-20360-BLOOM/Louis Hialeah, FL 33018 215-915-4416 Email: jpdatto@gmail.com 3

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?