Chapman v. Douglas County Official's et al
Filing
67
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - Plaintiff's Motion to Appoint Counsel (Filing No. 62 ) is denied without prejudice. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(AOA)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
BILLIE JOE CHAPMAN, Mentally
Handicapped,
Plaintiff,
v.
CHRIS ANDERSON, et al.,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
8:12CV370
MEMORANDUM
AND ORDER
Plaintiff has filed a motion seeking the appointment of counsel. (Filing No. 62.)
The court cannot routinely appoint counsel in civil cases. 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. Thus, the request for the appointment of
counsel is denied without prejudice to reassertion.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that: Plaintiff’s Motion to Appoint Counsel
(Filing No. 62) is denied without prejudice.
DATED this 17th day of April, 2014.
BY THE COURT:
Richard G. Kopf
Senior United States District Judge
*This opinion may contain hyperlinks to other documents or Web 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?