Halilovic v. AT&T et al

Filing 18

ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that pro se Plaintiff's motion (Doc. No. 17) to amend her complaint by adding Southwestern Bell Telephone Company as a Defendant is GRANTED. The Clerk of Court shall amend the docket sheet to reflect the addit ion of this Defendant. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's request for additional time up to September 28, 2012 to file an amended complaint is GRANTED. Plaintiff shall also have up to September 28, 2012 to respond to Defendant' s pending motion to dismiss the current complaint. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion (Doc. No. 3) for appointment of counsel is DENIED. There is no constitutional right for a pro se plaintiff to have counsel appointed in a c ivil case, Phillips v. Jasper County Jail, 437 F.3d. 791, 794 (8th Cir. 2006), and upon review of the relevant factors, the Court concludes that such appointment is not warranted here at this point in the proceedings. (Response to Court due by 9/28/2012.). Signed by District Judge Audrey G. Fleissig on 8/31/2012. (KSM)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
ALPHEA MARECIA HALILOVIC,
Plaintiff,
v.
AT&T and AT&T Services, Inc.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. 4:12CV00978 AGF

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that pro se Plaintiff’s motion (Doc. No. 17) to amend her
complaint by adding Southwestern Bell Telephone Company as a Defendant is GRANTED. The
Clerk of Court shall amend the docket sheet to reflect the addition of this Defendant.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s request for additional time up to
September 28, 2012 to file an amended complaint is GRANTED. Plaintiff shall also have up to
September 28, 2012 to respond to Defendant’s pending motion to dismiss the current complaint.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion (Doc. No. 3) for appointment of
counsel is DENIED. There is no constitutional right for a pro se plaintiff to have counsel
appointed in a civil case, Phillips v. Jasper County Jail, 437 F.3d. 791, 794 (8th Cir. 2006), and
upon review of the relevant factors, the Court concludes that such appointment is not warranted
here at this point in the proceedings.

AUDREY G. FLEISSIG
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated this 31st day of August, 2012.