Jackson v. Himelick et al

Filing 80

OPINION AND ORDER: DENYING 78 MOTION for Appointment of Counsel by Plaintiff Ricky Lynn Jackson, Sr. Signed by Magistrate Judge Susan L Collins on 5/13/2016. (lhc)(cc: Jackson)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
FORT WAYNE DIVISION
RICKY LYNN JACKSON, SR.,
Plaintiff,
v.
DARRELL HIMELICK, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
) CAUSE NO. 1:14-cv-00368-RL-SLC
)
)
)
)

OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Ricky Lynn Jackson, Sr., a pro se prisoner, filed a letter asking to be
appointed counsel in this civil lawsuit. (DE 78). “There is no right to court-appointed
counsel in federal civil litigation.” Olson v. Morgan, 750 F.3d 708, 711 (7th Cir. 2014) (citing
Pruitt v. Mote, 503 F.3d 647, 649 (7th Cir. 2007)). However, in some circumstances, the
court may ask an attorney to volunteer to represent indigent parties. “When confronted
with a request under § 1915(e)(1) for pro bono counsel, the district court is to make the
following inquiries: (1) has the indigent plaintiff made a reasonable attempt to obtain
counsel or been effectively precluded from doing so; and if so, (2) given the difficulty of
the case, does the plaintiff appear competent to litigate it himself?” Pruitt, 503 F.3d at
654. Here, Jackson has made a reasonable attempt to obtain counsel on his own.
Jackson argues that this case involves medical issues and may require expert
testimony. However, there does not appear be a medical dispute which would require
expert testimony. The only question here is whether Lt. Jail Commander Cathy Lee
denied Jackson medical treatment by taking his medically prescribed extra mat on May

9, 2015. This is not a case about whether (nor even why) he needed the mat, only whether
he was unconstitutionally denied the mat. Jackson argues that this case will require the
discovery of documents and depositions. However, Jackson is literate and coherent. He
is knowledgeable about his case. The issue is limited and focused. There is only one
defendant and Jackson knows what happened. To the extent that he needs documents,
there is no reason to believe that he is incapable of preparing a request for production of
documents and sending a copy to defense counsel and the Court. Neither is Jackson
incapable of writing the questions he wants to ask the Defendant and sending those
written interrogatories to defense counsel and the Court.
“Whether to recruit an attorney is a difficult decision: Almost everyone would
benefit from having a lawyer, but there are too many indigent litigants and too few
lawyers willing and able to volunteer for these cases. District courts are thus placed in
the unenviable position of identifying, among a sea of people lacking counsel, those who
need counsel the most.” Olson, 750 F.3d at 711. Here, because Jackson appears competent
to litigate this case on his own, his request (DE 78) that the court recruit counsel for him
is DENIED.
SO ORDERED.
Entered this 13th day of May 2016.

/s/ Susan Collins
Susan Collins,
United States Magistrate Judge

2