Suber v. Lemons et al

Filing 83

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER re: 75 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiffs motion for appointment of counsel [Doc. #75] is DENIED without prejudice. Signed by District Judge Rodney W. Sippel on 9/20/17. (ARL)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
CARLOS SUBER,
Plaintiff,
v.
FREDRICK LEMONS, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. 4:15-CV-1363 RWS

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff moves for appointment of counsel.

After considering the motion and the

pleadings, the motion is denied without prejudice to refiling at a later time.
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.
Plaintiff has presented non-frivolous allegations in his complaint.

Further, after

reviewing plaintiff’s responses to defendants’ motions to dismiss, plaintiff has demonstrated that
he can adequately present his claims to the Court and defend his allegations in a cogent and
constructive manner. Additionally, neither the factual nor the legal issues in this case are
complex.

To the extent necessary, the Court will entertain future motions for appointment of
counsel as the case progresses.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion for appointment of counsel [Doc.
#75] is DENIED without prejudice.
Dated this 20th day of September, 2017.

RODNEY W. SIPPEL
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

-2-