Greer v. Scutt

Filing 13

ORDER denying 10 Motion to Appoint Counsel; denying as moot 10 Motion for Extension of Time and Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages. Signed by District Judge John Corbett O'Meara. (WBar)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION ARTHUR CORTEZ GREER, JR., Case No. 11-12745 Petitioner, Honorable John Corbett O’Meara v. DEBRA SCUTT, Respondent. / ORDER DENYING PETITIONER’S MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL, DENYING AS MOOT PETITIONER’S MOTION TO EXTEND TIME, AND DENYING AS MOOT PETITIONER’S MOTION TO EXTEND PAGE LIMIT This matter came before the court on petitioner Arthur Cortez Greer, Jr.’s January 2, 2013 Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to Report and Recommendation, Motion for Extension of Five-Page Limit, and Motion for Appointment of Counsel. No response was filed, and no oral argument was heard. The appointment of counsel in a civil case is a privilege and not a constitutional right, one that should be allowed only in exceptional cases. Lopez v. Reyes, 692 F.2d 15, 17 (5th Cir. 1982). The United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit has advised that district courts, in considering an application for appointment of counsel in civil cases, “should at least consider plaintiff’s financial resources, the efforts of plaintiff to obtain counsel, and whether plaintiff’s claim appears to have any merit.” Henry v. City of Detroit Manpower Dep’t., 763 F.2d 757, 760 (6th Cir. 1985). In reviewing Petitioner's motion for appointment of counsel, the court finds no exceptional circumstances for the appointment of counsel. Therefore, the court will deny this portion of Petitioner’s motion. On December 14, 2012, Magistrate Paul J. Komives issued a 36-page Report and Recommendation, recommending that the court deny Petitioner’s application for a writ of habeas corpus. Pursuant to Rule 72(b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Petitioner was allowed 14 days to file objections to the Report and Recommendation. Petitioner filed his motion to extend the time in which to file objections and to extend his page limit January 2, 2013. On January 16, 2013, however, Petitioner filed a 10-page objection to the Report and Recommendation. Although it is not the practice of this court to allow extensions of time and page limits on objections to reports and recommendations, in this limited instance, the court will accept Petitioner’s January 16, 2013 objections and deny as moot the portions of the his motion requesting the extensions. ORDER It is hereby ORDERED that petitioner Greer’s motion for appointment of counsel is DENIED. It is further ORDERED that petitioner Greer’s motion for extension of time to file objections and for an extension of the page limit is DENIED AS MOOT. s/John Corbett O'Meara United States District Judge Date: September 11, 2013 I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the parties of record on this date, September 11, 2013, using the ECF system and/or ordinary mail. s/William Barkholz Case Manager 2

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?