Ramos v. Rosevthal et al

Filing 6

ORDER - The plaintiff's Motion to Appoint Counsel 3 is denied. Signed by Magistrate Judge F. A. Gossett on 3/17/2006. (KBJ)

Download PDF
Ramos v. Rosevthal et al Doc. 6 Case: 4:06-cv-03052-JFB-PRSE Document #: 6 Date Filed: 03/17/2006 Page 1 of 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA JULIO RAMOS, Plaintiff, vs. UNKNOWN ROSEVTHAL, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 4:06CV3052 ORDER This matter is before the court on filing no. 3, the motion for appointment of counsel filed by the plaintiff. The court cannot routinely appoint counsel in civil cases. In Davis v. Scott, 94 F.3d 444, 447 (8 th Cir. 1996), the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals explained: A>Indigent civil litigants do not have a constitutional or statutory right to appointed counsel.=... The trial court has broad discretion to decide whether both the plaintiff and the court will benefit from the appointment of counsel, taking into account the factual and legal complexity of the case, the presence or absence of conflicting testimony, and the plaintiff's ability to investigate the facts and present his claim.@ (Citations omitted.) The plaintiff has capably presented the factual basis for the claims in this proceeding. I find that appointment of counsel is not necessary to enable the plaintiff to pursue those claims. Therefore, the motion for appointed counsel, is denied. SO ORDERED. DATED this 17th day of March, 2006. BY THE COURT: S/F.A. GOSSETT United States Magistrate Judge Dockets.Justia.com

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?