Garrett v. Houston County, Georgia et al

Filing 3

ORDER denying 2 Motion to Appoint Counsel. Ordered by Judge Hugh Lawson on 3/29/2010. (nbp)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT F O R THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA M A C O N DIVISION M IC H A E L GARRETT, : : P la in tiff, : : v. : : H O U S T O N COUNTY, GEORGIA, et : a l., : : D e fe n d a n ts . : : _______________________________ :

5:1 0 -cv -1 1 2 (HL)

ORDER B e fo re the Court is Plaintiff's Motion to Appoint Counsel (Doc. 2). For the fo llo w in g reasons, the motion is denied. P la in tiff Michael Garrett ("Garrett") filed a pro se complaint against his e m p lo y e rs . His complaint alleges that the Defendants discriminated against him o n the basis of his race in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Garrett requests that the Court appoint counsel on his behalf because he does n o t believe he can adequately represent himself . He has contacted three law firm s and all have declined to represent him. The general rule is that there is no entitlement to appointed counsel in a civil rig h ts case. Poole v. Lambert, 819 F.2d 1025, 1028 (11th Cir. 1987). The

decision of whether to provide counsel lies within the discretion of the district court. 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(1). The district court should exercise its discretion by

appointing counsel only when there are "exceptional circumstances, such as where the facts and legal issues are so novel or complex as to require the assistance of a tra in e d practitioner." Dean v. Barber, 951 F.2d 1210, 1216 (11th Cir. 1992) (citation o m it t e d ) . The Court finds that Garrett has not shown exceptional circumstances that w arra n t the appointment of counsel. At this juncture, it seems that Garrett has set forth a fairly straightforward case of race discrimination. He has adequately a rticu la te d the facts and legal issues that govern his claim. Accordingly, the Court d e n ie s Garrett's Motion to Appoint Counsel. If at a later date it becomes apparent tha t his case presents complex legal or factual issues then the Court will entertain a n o th e r motion for the appointment of counsel. S O ORDERED, this the 29th day of March, 2010.

s / Hugh Lawson HUGH LAWSON, SENIOR JUDGE lm c

2