Foster v. Lombardi et al
Filing
56
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER... IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's Renewed Motion for Appointment of Counsel and Medical Expert 48 is DENIED. Signed by District Judge John A. Ross on 7/24/2013. (JMC)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
SOUTHEASTERN DIVISION
WILLIAM WENTWORTH FOSTER,
Plaintiff,
v.
GEORGE LOMBARDI, et al.,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
No. 1:12-CV-00116-JAR
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Renewed Motion for Appointment of
Counsel and Medical Expert. [ECF No. 48] For the following reasons, Plaintiff’s motion will be
denied.
Plaintiff previously requested appointment of counsel (Doc. No. 4) and the Court denied
his request, finding that neither the factual nor legal issues are complex, and that Plaintiff is able
to articulate and clearly present his position. (Doc. No. 23) For these reasons, the Court again
finds appointment of counsel is not mandated. Plaintiff filed a twenty-three (23) page complaint
(Doc. No. 1), followed by a forty-six (46) page amended complaint (Doc. No. 7), in which he
sets forth all of his claims. Upon review, the Court finds Plaintiff has a thorough understanding
of his medical condition as well as the prison grievance procedure, and is clearly able to
articulate his claims against Defendants and underlying legal theories. Thus, Plaintiff’s motion
for appointment of counsel will be denied without prejudice.
Further, because Plaintiff’s own medical records will establish his diagnosis and history
of treatment by Defendants, his request for appointment of a medical expert will also be denied.
1
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Renewed Motion for Appointment of
Counsel and Medical Expert [48] is DENIED.
Dated this 24th day of July, 2013.
_______________________________
JOHN A. ROSS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?