Hazlett v. Pine Lawn, City of, et al

Filing 44

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion to Request Pro Bono Public Service 42 is DENIED.. Signed by District Judge John A. Ross on 11/13/13. (LGK)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION GREGORY HAZLETT, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF PINE LAWN and OFFICER STEVE LOWMAN, Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 4:12CV1715 JAR MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff=s Motion to Request Pro Bono Public Service, filed on November 5, 2013 (ECF No. 42).1 With respect to Plaintiff=s Motion to Request Pro Bono Public Service, 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. 1 The Court construes Plaintiff=s Motion to Request Pro Bono Public Service as a motion for appointment of counsel. After considering Plaintiff=s Motion to Request Pro Bono Public Service 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 Gregory Hazlett indicate that he is capable of presenting the facts and legal issues without the assistance of counsel. Plaintiff=s Motion to Request Pro Bono Public Service will therefore be denied. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff=s Motion to Request Pro Bono Public Service [42] is DENIED. Dated this 13th day of November, 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?