Lampley v. Mitcheff et al

Filing 49

OPINION AND ORDER denying 40 Motion to Appoint Counsel. Signed by Magistrate Judge Christopher A Nuechterlein on 1/9/09. (cc: 12 copies of 23 Order) (ksc)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA SOUTH BEND DIVISION TOMMY LAMPLEY, Plaintiff, v. DR. MICHAEL MITCHEFF, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

CAUSE NO. 3:08-CV- 282 PS

OPINION AND ORDER Tommy Lampley, a pro se prisoner, filed a motion asking the Court to appoint counsel to represent him. However, 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 v. Mote, 5003 F. 3D 647, 654 (7th Cir. 2007)(en banc). To show he has tried to obtain counsel, Lampley attached twelve letters he received from attorneys he claims to have contacted about representing him in this case. However, because all of the letters predate this Court's screening order, it would have been difficult for an attorney to determine whether Lampley even stated a claim. Consequently, Lampley's effort to secure counsel on his own, as this record shows, was not a reasonable attempt. "If . . . the indigent has made no reasonable attempts to secure counsel . . ., the court should deny any § 1915(d) motions outright." Jackson v. County of McLean, 953 F.2d 1070, 1073 (7th Cir. 1992).

Therefore, the Court: (1) DENIES the motion for appointment of counsel [Doc. No. 40]; and (2) DIRECTS the Clerk to send Tommy Lampley twelve (12) copies of this Court's screening order [Doc. No. 23] so that he can make a reasonable attempt to obtain counsel on his own. SO ORDERED. Dated this 9th Day of January, 2009. S/Christopher A. Nuechterlein Christopher A. Nuechterlein United States Magistrate Judge

2