Jones v. Barnhart et al

Filing 107

ORDER CONDITIONALLY GRANTING Plaintiff's 103 Notice (Other) filed by John Jones.--Signed by Magistrate Judge Anthony P. Patti. (MWil)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
JOHN JONES,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 2:10-cv-12114
District Judge Arthur J. Tarnow
Magistrate Judge Anthony P. Patti

PATRICIA BARNHARDT,
et al.,
Defendants.
___________________________________/
ORDER CONDITIONALLY GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR
APPOINTMENT OF AN ATTORNEY (DE 103)
On September 16, 2015, Plaintiff filed a document titled “Notice to the
Court,” in which he outlines several impediments he has encountered in pursuing
this case. (DE 103.) Most importantly, he indicates that he will no longer be
assisted by a legal writer and notes that this will render him “physically unable to
file” documents himself due to a physical disability and asks the Court to
reconsider his requests that he be granted appointment of counsel in this matter.
To support his position, he provides a May 1, 2015 memorandum indicating that he
is no longer entitled to the assistance of a legal writer and a March 20, 2003
memorandum outlining his spinal cord injury, which limits the use of his hands.
(DE 103 at 4-5.) Defendants have not responded to the instant motion.

Plaintiff has filed four previous motions for the appointment of counsel (DE
3, 10, 39, and 80), all of which were denied without prejudice (DE 21, 45, and 88).
Since that time, Plaintiff has survived two motions for summary judgment filed by
Defendant Barnhardt. Plaintiff’s relative success in dispositive motion practice
thus far, along with his physical impairment and lack of access to a legal writer,
persuades me that appointment of counsel in this instance would be appropriate.1
Accordingly, his request for appointment of counsel is CONDITIONALLY
GRANTED. This case will be referred to the Court’s pro bono administrator. If
an attorney is found who will agree to represent Plaintiff in this case, an order of
appointment will be entered.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: October 15, 2015

s/Anthony P. Patti
Anthony P. Patti
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

1

Although Plaintiff styles his request as one for appointment of counsel, the Court
does not have the authority to appoint a private attorney for Plaintiff in this civil
matter. Proceedings IFP are governed by 28 U.S.C. § 1915, which provides that
“[t]he court may request an attorney to represent any person unable to afford
counsel.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1) (emphasis added). However, even if the
circumstances of Plaintiff’s case convinced the Court to engage in such a search,
“[t]here is no right to recruitment of counsel in federal civil litigation, but a district
court has discretion to recruit counsel under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1).” Dewitt v.
Corizon, Inc., 760 F.3d 654, 657 (7th Cir. 2014); see also Olson v. Morgan, 750
F.3d 708, 712 (7th Cir. 2014) (“Congress hasn’t provided lawyers for indigent
prisoners; instead it gave district courts discretion to ask lawyers to volunteer their
services in some cases.”). 

2

I hereby certify that a copy of this document was sent to parties of record on
October 15, 2015, electronically and/or by U.S. Mail.

s/Michael Williams
Case Manager for the
Honorable Anthony P. Patti

3