Tropicana Entertainment, Inc. v. N3A Manufacturing, Inc.

Filing 68

ORDER that defendants' motion for appointment of counsel (ECF No. 63 ) is DENIED. Signed by Judge Larry R. Hicks on 4/10/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - LH)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 8 *** 9 TROPICANA ENTERTAINMENT INC., 10 Plaintiff, Case No. 3:16-cv-0257-LRH-VPC 11 v. 12 13 14 ORDER N3A MANUFACTURING, INC., d/b/a HOTELURE, INC.; NIALL ALLI; ADRIENNE ALLI; RICHARD BENNETT; JAY KALMAN; and JOSEPH RIZZO, 15 Defendants. 16 17 18 Before the court is defendants N3A Manufacturing, Inc., d/b/a Hotelure, Inc. 19 (“Hotelure”); Niall Alli; and Jay Kalman’s (collectively “defendants”) motion for appointment of 20 counsel. ECF No. 63. 21 Defendants request appointment of counsel in this civil action because they no longer 22 have the resources to pay for their own counsel. However, defendants have failed to establish 23 that exceptional circumstances warrant the appointment of counsel. First, defendants are not at 24 risk of having their physical liberty lost if they lose the litigation. See e.g., Lassiter v. Dept. of 25 Social Services of Durham County, N.C., 452 U.S. 18, 25 (1981) (recognizing that an indigent 26 defendant only has a right to counsel in civil actions if their physical liberty is at risk). Second, 27 defendants have not made any showing that they are unable to represent themselves in this 28 contract dispute action or put on any defense. Finally, even if the court were to appoint counsel 1 1 for the individual defendants, corporate defendant Hotelure would not be entitled to appointed 2 counsel as a matter of law. Therefore, the court shall deny defendants’ motion. 3 4 5 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that defendants’ motion for appointment of counsel (ECF No. 63) is DENIED. 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. 7 DATED this 10th day of April, 2018. 8 LARRY R. HICKS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

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?