Pritchett v. Wallace et al
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER re: 25 MOTION to Appoint Counsel filed by Plaintiff Eric Pritchett motion is DENIED. Signed by District Judge Stephen N. Limbaugh, Jr on 12/4/13. (MRS)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
IAN WALLACE, et al.,
No. 1:13CV100 SNLJ
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on plaintiff’s motion for appointment of
counsel. The motion will be denied.
There is no constitutional or statutory right to appointed counsel in civil cases.
Nelson v. Redfield Lithograph Printing, 728 F.2d 1003, 1004 (8th Cir. 1984). In
determining whether to appoint counsel, the Court considers several factors,
including (1) whether the plaintiff has presented non-frivolous allegations supporting
his or her prayer for relief; (2) whether the plaintiff will substantially benefit from the
appointment of counsel; (3) whether there is a need to further investigate and present
the facts related to the plaintiff’s allegations; and (4) whether the factual and legal
issues presented by the action are complex. See Johnson v. Williams, 788 F.2d 1319,
1322-23 (8th Cir. 1986); Nelson, 728 F.2d at 1005.
While plaintiff has several different claims against twenty-four defendants,
none of the claims, by themselves, are factually or legally complex. As of this time,
plaintiff has shown that he is able to set forth his claims in a clear and reasonable
manner. As a result, the Court finds that appointment of counsel is not warranted at
this time. The Court may reconsider this decision at a later date.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion for appointment of
counsel [ECF No. 25] is DENIED.
Dated this 4th day of December, 2013.
STEPHEN N. LIMBAUGH, JR.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?