Proby v. Bullock et al

Filing 55

OPINION MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion for appointment of counsel [Doc. # 54 ] is DENIED, without prejudice. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 2/26/15. (KJS)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
GEORGE PROBY, JR.,
Plaintiff,
v.
D.R. BULLOCK, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. 4:14CV1355 HEA

OPINION, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on plaintiff=s third motion for appointment of
counsel [Doc. #54]. Plaintiff again asserts that the issues in this case are complex,
he does not understand discovery procedures, and he lacks “ready access” to a law
library. In addition, plaintiff states that he lacks the resources to obtain documents
and the names of parties and witnesses. For the following reasons, the motion will
be denied without prejudice.
AA pro se litigant has no statutory or constitutional right to have counsel
appointed in a civil case.@ Stevens v. Redwing, 146 F.3d 538, 546 (8th Cir. 1998).
When determining whether to appoint counsel for an indigent litigant, the Court
considers relevant factors, such as the complexity of the case, the ability of the pro se
litigant to investigate the facts, the existence of conflicting testimony, and the ability
of the pro se litigant to present his or her claim. Id.

After reviewing these factors, the Court finds that the appointment of counsel
is not warranted at this time. Moreover, at the Court has previously noted, this case
is neither factually nor legally complex, and it is evident that plaintiff is able to
present his claims. Consequently, the motion will be denied, without prejudice.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff=s motion for appointment of
counsel [Doc. #54] is DENIED, without prejudice.
Dated this 26th day of February, 2015

___________________________________
HENRY EDWARD AUTREY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2