BALL v. ALLEN et al

Filing 7

ORDER denying 5 Motion to Appoint Counsel. Ordered by US MAGISTRATE JUDGE CHARLES H WEIGLE on 11/22/2024 (elp)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
MACON DIVISION
TRAVIS BALL,

:
:
Plaintiff,
:
:
VS.
:
:
Lt. KEITH ALLEN;
:
et al.,
:
:
:
Defendants.
:
_________________________________:

NO. 5:24-cv-314-CAR-CHW

Proceedings Under 42 U.S.C. §1983
Before the U.S. Magistrate Judge

ORDER
Plaintiff filed a motion requesting that the Court appoint counsel to represent him
in his lawsuit brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. ECF No. 5. As this is Plaintiff’s first
request for counsel, the Court advises Plaintiff that “[a]ppointment of counsel in a civil
case is not a constitutional right.” Wahl v. McIver, 773 F.2d 1169, 1174 (11th Cir. 1985).
Appointment of counsel is a privilege that is justified only by exceptional circumstances.
Id. In deciding whether legal counsel should be provided, the Court considers, among other
factors, the merits of Plaintiff’s claim and the complexity of the issues presented. Holt v.
Ford, 862 F.2d 850, 853 (11th Cir. 1989). 1

The federal in forma pauperis statute authorizes courts to “request an attorney to represent
any person unable to afford counsel.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). The statute does not,
however, provide any funding to pay attorneys for their representation or authorize courts
to compel attorneys to represent an indigent party in a civil case. See Mallard v. U.S. Dist.
Ct. for S. Dist. of Iowa, 490 U.S. 296 (1989).
1

In accordance with Holt, and upon a review of the record in this case, the Court
notes that Plaintiff has set forth the essential factual allegations underlying his claims, and
that the applicable legal doctrines are readily apparent. As such, Plaintiff’s Motion for
Appointment of Counsel is DENIED. ECF No. 5. Should it later become apparent that
legal assistance is required in order to avoid prejudice to Plaintiff’s rights, the Court, on its
own motion, will consider assisting him in securing legal counsel at that time.
Consequently, there is no need for Plaintiff to file additional requests for counsel.
SO ORDERED, this 20th day of November, 2024.
s/ Charles H. Weigle
Charles H. Weigle
United States Magistrate Judge