Brown v. Detroit, City of et al

Filing 61

ORDER DENYING 59 MOTION to Appoint Counsel and DENYING 58 Application to Proceed Without Prepaying Fees or Costs on Appeal filed by Henry Brown. Signed by District Judge Robert H. Cleland. (LWag)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION

HENRY BROWN,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 12-13402

CITY OF DETROIT and LATONYA BROOKS,
Defendants.
/
ORDER DENYING APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS ON
APPEAL AND REQUEST TO APPOINT COUNSEL
This is a civil rights case stemming from the arrest of pro se Plaintiff Henry
Brown. After 270 days detention, he was determined to be innocent, and released. (See
Dkt. # 23.) In an order entered June 9, 2017 (Dkt. # 55), this court adopted the report
and recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge David R. Grand (Dkt. # 46) in
its entirety and granted summary judgment in favor of Defendants. Now before the court
are two motions filed by Plaintiff. The first is a motion to proceed in forma pauperis on
appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. (Dkt. # 58.) The second is a motion for the
appointment of counsel, also under 28 U.S.C. § 1915. (Dkt. # 59.)
In its June 9 order, the court explained that Plaintiff had failed to file proper
objections to the report and recommendation, which constituted a waiver of any right to
object to the magistrate judge’s findings. (See Dkt. # 55, Pg. ID 680-81.) The failure to
file proper objections also waives any right to appeal. Spencer v. Bouchard, 449 F.3d
721, 724-25 (6th Cir. 2006) (finding overly general objections to report and

recommendation waive right to appeal any portions adopted by district court) abrogated
on other grounds by Jones v. Bock, 549 U.S. 199 (2007).
As the court has already concluded Plaintiff waived any right to appeal, the court
concludes no appeal can be taken in good faith. Accordingly, the court will deny
Plaintiff’s request to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
1915(a)(3). For the same reason, the court will deny Plaintiff’s request for an attorney
without prejudice to Plaintiff’s ability to make the same request of the Sixth Circuit.
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis on
appeal (Dkt. # 58) is DENIED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion for the appointment of counsel
(Dkt. # 59) is DENIED.

s/Robert H. Cleland
ROBERT H. CLELAND
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

/

Dated: July 31, 2017
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was mailed to counsel of record
on this date, July 31, 2017, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.
s/Lisa Wagner
Case Manager and Deputy Clerk
[phone]

S:\Cleland\JUDGE'S DESK\C1 ORDERS\12-13402.BROWN.deny.ifp.appeal.transfer.appoint.attorney.TLH.RHC.docx

2

/