Hazlett v. Pine Lawn, City of, et al
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)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
CITY OF PINE LAWN and
OFFICER STEVE LOWMAN,
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
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff=s Motion to Request Pro Bono Public
Service  is DENIED.
Dated this 13th day of November, 2013.
JOHN A. ROSS
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?