Sherrod v. Harkleroad et al

Filing 68

ORDER dismissing as moot Deft John Morgan's 56 Motion for entry of consent order; denying Pltf's 63 Second Motion for appointment of counsel for reasons stated in the Court's 4/23/12 Order, (Doc. No. 5 ). Signed by Chief Judge Robert J. Conrad, Jr on 5/6/13. (Pro se litigant served by US Mail.)(ejb) Modified document restriction on 5/7/2013 (ejb). NEF Regenerated.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
ASHEVILLE DIVISION
1:12-cv-48-RJC
MARION LAMONT SHERROD,
Plaintiff,
v.
SID HARKLEROAD, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

ORDER

THIS MATTER is before the Court on consideration of Defendant John Morgan’s
motion for entry of consent order, (Doc. No. 56), and Plaintiff’s second motion to appoint
counsel. (Doc. No. 63). On February 20, 2013, the Court entered an Order granting Defendant
Morgan’s motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, and Plaintiff has not appealed. Defendant
Morgan is therefore no longer a party to this action and his motion will be dismissed as moot.
Plaintiff’s motion to appoint counsel has previously been denied by Order entered on
April 23, 2012, (Doc. No. 5). Plaintiff, in his present motion, articulates no new reasons to
support the discretionary appointment of counsel, and his motion will be denied for the reasons
stated in the Court’s April 23rd Order.
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that:
1.

Defendant John Morgan’s motion for entry of consent order is DISMISSED as
moot. (Doc. No. 56).

2.

Plaintiff’s second motion for appointment of counsel, (Doc. No. 63), is DENIED
for the reasons stated in the Court’s April 23, 2012 Order. (Doc. No. 5).

1

Signed: May 6, 2013

2