Reynolds v. Russell
Filing
7
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion for appointment of counsel [ECF No. 4 ] is DENIED without prejudice. Signed by District Judge Catherine D. Perry on June 27, 2014. (BRP)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
DEMETRIUS REYNOLDS,
Petitioner,
v.
TERRY RUSSELL,
Respondent.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
No. 4:14CV1060 CDP
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on plaintiff's motion for appointment of counsel. 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.
After considering these factors, the Court finds that the facts and legal issues involved are
not so complicated that the appointment of counsel is warranted at this time.
Petitioner’s
allegations are straightforward, and petitioner has demonstrated an ability to present his claims
with clarity.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion for appointment of counsel [ECF
No. 4] is DENIED without prejudice.
Dated this 27th day of June, 2014.
CATHERINE D. PERRY
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?