Henderson v. The United States Marine Corps
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER (See Full Order) IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion for appointment of counsel is DENIED without prejudice. [ECF No. 2 ]. Signed by District Judge Catherine D. Perry on 3/12/18. (EAB)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
JULIUS R. HENDERSON,
THE UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS,
No. 4:17-CV-2349 CDP
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on pro se plaintiff Julius R. Henderson’s motion to
appoint 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. However, he has
demonstrated, at this point, that he can adequately present his claims to the Court. Additionally,
neither the factual nor the legal issues in this case are complex.
The Court will entertain future motions for appointment of counsel as the case
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion for appointment of counsel is
DENIED without prejudice. [ECF No. 2]
Dated this 12th day of March, 2018.
CATHERINE D. PERRY
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?