Green v. Creighton/CHI Health et al

Filing 6

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER that leave to proceed in forma pauperis is provisionally granted, and the Complaint shall be filed without payment of fees. Plaintiff's Motion for Appointment of Counsel (Filing No. 3 ) is denied without prejudice to reas sertion. Plaintiff is advised that the next step in his case will be for the court to conduct an initial review of his claims to determine whether summary dismissal is appropriate under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). The court will conduct this initial review in its normal course of business. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party) (LAC)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
ANTHONY SPENCER GREEN SR., )
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
V.
)
)
CREIGHTON/CHI HEALTH,
)
REBECCA STORMONT, MD,
)
VIRGINIA J. SMITH, APRN, and
)
ANNIE E. KNIERIM, Orthopedic
)
Surgeon,
)
)
Defendants.
)
)

8:16CV480

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Plaintiff, a non-prisoner, filed a Motion for Leave to Proceed in Forma
Pauperis. (Filing No. 2.) Upon review of Plaintiff’s Motion, the court finds that
Plaintiff is financially eligible to proceed in forma pauperis.
Plaintiff also filed a Motion (Filing No. 3) seeking the appointment of counsel.
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.” Trial courts have “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.” Id. Having
considered these factors, the request for the appointment of counsel will be denied
without prejudice to reassertion.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that leave to proceed in forma pauperis is
provisionally granted, and the Complaint shall be filed without payment of fees.

Plaintiff’s Motion for Appointment of Counsel (Filing No. 3) is denied without
prejudice to reassertion. Plaintiff is advised that the next step in his case will be for
the court to conduct an initial review of his claims to determine whether summary
dismissal is appropriate under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). The court will conduct this
initial review in its normal course of business.
DATED this 14th day of November, 2016.
BY THE COURT:
s/ Richard G. Kopf
Senior United States District Judge

2