Wiley v. Austin et al

Filing 49

ORDER - Plaintiff has filed a motion seeking appointment of counsel. However, "[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[.]" Davis v. Scott, 94 F.3d 444, 447 (8th Cir. 1996). No such benefit is apparent here at this time. Accordingly, the request for the appointment of counsel (Filing No. 46 ) is denied without prejudice to reassertion. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Susan M. Bazis. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(LAC)

8:20-cv-00220-BCB-SMB Doc # 49 Filed: 01/08/21 Page 1 of 1 - Page ID # 240

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
TIMOTHY J. WILEY,
Plaintiff,

8:20CV220

vs.
ORDER
AUSTIN CHRISTIANSEN, SS2 Employee, in
Individual Capacity; TERRI J. BRUEGMAN,
Unit Manager, in Individual Capacity; DREW
ENGLISH, Compliance Team, in Individual
Capacity; DON WHITMAR, Compliance Team,
in Individual Capacity; VICTOR V. VAN
FLEET, Therapist, in Individual Capacity; MIKE
EPPEMAN, Social Worker, in Individual
Capacity; and JACOB CHAPMAN,
Defendants.
Plaintiff has filed a motion seeking appointment of counsel. However, “[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[.]” Davis v. Scott, 94 F.3d 444, 447 (8th Cir. 1996). No such benefit is
apparent here at this time. Accordingly, the request for the appointment of counsel (Filing No. 46)
is denied without prejudice to reassertion.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated this 8th day of January, 2021.
BY THE COURT:
s/ Susan M. Bazis
United States Magistrate Judge