Jackson v. Green et al
Filing
28
OPINION MEMORANDUM re: 26 MOTION to Appoint Counsel filed by Plaintiff Anthony Jackson. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion for appointment of counsel [Doc. No. 26] is DENIED without prejudice. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 2/22/18. (CSG)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
ANTHONY JACKSON,
Plaintiff,
v.
NICOLE GREEN, et al.,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
No. 1:17CV143 HEA
OPINION, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff moves for appointment of counsel [Doc. No. 26]. After considering the motion
and the pleadings, the motion is denied without prejudice to refiling at a later time.
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.
Plaintiff has presented certain allegations in his complaint.
However, he has
demonstrated, at this point, that he can adequately present his claims to the Court. Additionally,
neither the factual nor the legal issues in this case are complex.
The Court will entertain future motions for appointment of counsel, if necessary, as the
case progresses.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion for appointment of counsel [Doc.
No. 26] is DENIED without prejudice.
Dated this 22nd day of February, 2018.
HENRY EDWARD AUTREY
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?