Clark v. Smith

Filing 14

ORDER denying 13 Motion to Appoint Counsel Signed by Honorable Jean C. Hamilton on 11/12/08. (CEL)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION CALVIN K. CLARK, Petitioner(s), v. PAT SMITH, Respondent(s). ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ORDER This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff's Motion for Appointment of Counsel, filed November 12, 2008. (Doc. No. 13). There is no constitutional or statutory right to appointed counsel in a civil case. Nelson v. Redfield Lithograph Printing, 728 F.2d 1003, 1004 (8th Cir. 1984). In determining whether to appoint counsel, courts consider factors that include whether the plaintiff has presented non-frivolous allegations supporting his prayer for relief, whether the plaintiff will substantially benefit from the appointment of counsel, whether there is a need to further investigate and present the facts related to the plaintiff's allegations, and whether the factual and legal issues presented by the action are complex. See Battle v. Armontrout, 902 F.2d 701, 702 (8th Cir. 1990); Johnson v. Williams, 788 F.2d 1319, 1322-23 (8th Cir. 1986); Nelson, 728 F.2d at 1005. Aft er considering Plaintiff's Motion for Appointment of Counsel in view of the relevant factors, the Court finds that the facts and legal issues presented in the instant case are not so complex as to warrant the appointment of counsel at this time. In addition, the pleadings filed by Calvin Clark indicate that he is capable of presenting the facts and legal issues without the assistance of counsel. Plaintiff's Motion for Appointment of Counsel will therefore be denied.

Case No. 4:07CV01357-JCH

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion for Appointment of Counsel (Doc. No. 13) is DENIED.

Dated this 12th day of November, 2008.

/s/ Jean C. Hamilton UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

-2-