Proby v. Bullock et al
OPINION MEMORANDUM AND ORDER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiffs motions for appointment of counsel [Doc. #71] are DENIEDWITHOUT PREJUDICE. 71 Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 11/16/15. (CLA) (Main Document 83 replaced on 11/16/2015) (CLA).
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
GEORGE PROBY, JR.,
D. R. BULLOCK, et. Al.,
No. 4:14cv1355 HEA
OPINION, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s motion for appointment of counsel [Doc.
#71]. The motion will be denied, without prejudice.
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 appointment of counsel is not
warranted at this time. This case is neither factually nor legally complex. Moreover, it is evident
that Plaintiff is able to present claims.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motions for appointment of counsel [Doc.
#71] are DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
Dated this 16th day of November, 2015.
HENRY EDWARD AUTREY
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?