Payne v. Britten et al
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - Plaintiff's Motion to Appoint Counsel (filing no. 70 ) is denied. Ordered by Judge Joseph F. Bataillon. (Copy mailed to pro se party) (AOA)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
CHRISTOPHER M. PAYNE,
FRED BRITTEN, et al.,
This matter is before the court on Plaintiff’s Motion to Appoint Counsel. (Filing No.
70.) In Davis v. Scott, 94 F.3d 444, 447 (8th Cir. 1996), the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals
explained that “[i]ndigent 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 . . . .” Id. (quotation and
citation omitted). No such benefit is apparent here. The request for the appointment of
counsel is therefore denied without prejudice.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Appoint Counsel (filing
no. 70) is denied.
DATED this 14 th day of June, 2012.
BY THE COURT:
s/ Joseph F. Bataillon
United States District Judge
*This opinion may contain hyperlinks to other documents or W eb sites. The U.S. District Court for the District
of Nebraska does not endorse, recommend, approve, or guarantee any third parties or the services or products they
provide on their Web sites. Likewise, the court has no agreements with any of these third parties or their Web sites. The
court accepts no responsibility for the availability or functionality of any hyperlink. Thus, the fact that a hyperlink ceases
to work or directs the user to some other site does not affect the opinion of the court.
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?