Filing 19

ENTRY - Plaintiff's 18 Motion to Rule on Motion to Appoint Counsel is DENIED AS MOOT because the plaintiff's motion to appoint counsel filed on January 16, 2013, was denied in the Entry of January 29, 2013. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 5/20/2013. Copy Mailed. (JD)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION MARK JENKINS, Plaintiff, v. SUPERINTENDENT WENDY KNIGHT, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. 1:13-cv-0099-TWP-MJD ENTRY The plaintiff’s motion to rule on motion to appoint counsel [Dkt. 18] is denied as moot because the plaintiff’s motion to appoint counsel filed on January 16, 2013, was denied in the Entry of January 29, 2013. To the extent the plaintiff renews his motion for the appointment of counsel, he is informed that a litigant requesting that counsel be recruited must show as a threshold matter that he made a reasonable attempt to secure private counsel. Gil v. Reed, 381 F.3d 649, 656 (7th Cir. 2004); Zarnes v. Rhodes, 64 F.3d 285, 288 (7th Cir. 1995). The court must deny "out of hand" a request for counsel made without a showing of such effort. Farmer v. Haas, 990 F.2d 319, 321 (7th Cir. 1993). The plaintiff’s motion for the appointment of counsel alleges that he sent letters to five lawyers. A sampling as small as this does not constitute a reasonable effort to retain counsel. Accordingly, the plaintiff’s renewed motion for the appointment of counsel [Dkt. 18] must be denied for this reason as well. IT IS SO ORDERED. 05/20/2013 Date: __________________ ________________________ Hon. Tanya Walton Pratt, Judge United States District Court Southern District of Indiana Distribution: Mark Jenkins #963737 Correctional Industrial Facility Inmate Mail/Parcels 5124 West Reformatory Rd. Pendleton, IN 46064 All electronically registered counsel

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?