Laramore v. Washington County Jail
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER re: 25 MOTION to Appoint Counsel filed by Plaintiff Dennis Laramore. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion for Appointment of Counsel 25 is DENIED. Signed by District Judge John A. Ross on 10/17/17. (CSG)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
SHANNON THOMPSON, et al.,
No. 4:17-CV-01618 JAR
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion for Appointment of Counsel (Doc.
No. 25). After review of the record in this matter, the Court declines to appoint counsel for
Plaintiff at this 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 nonfrivolous 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 the facts and legal issues involved in this action are not
so complicated that the appointment of counsel is warranted at this time. As such, Plaintiff’s
motion for appointment of counsel will be denied, without prejudice.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Appointment of Counsel  is
Dated this 17th day of October, 2017.
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?