Greene v. Mullis et al
ORDER denying 89 Pro Se Motion for Scheduling Order and Motion for the Appointment of Counsel. Signed by Magistrate Judge David S. Cayer on 5/9/2022. (Pro se litigant served by US Mail.)(mek)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:17-CV-00638-RJC-DSC
MICHAEL LEE GREENE,
KEVIN R. MULLIS et. al.,
THIS MATTER is before the Court on pro se Plaintiff’s “Motion for Scheduling Order
and Motion for the Appointment of Counsel” (document # 89).
The parties recently participated in a PSAP mediation which resulted in an impasse. See
document #88. The Clerk’s office has issued a Notice directing the parties to conduct the Initial
Plaintiff cites no applicable authority supporting his request for court appointed counsel in
a civil case. Moreover, the Court is not aware of any case law, statute, Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure, or Local Rule requiring the appointment of counsel in a civil case such as the one
brought by Plaintiff, and no funds have been appropriated for that purpose.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT:
1. Plaintiff’s “Motion for Scheduling Order and Motion for the Appointment of Counsel”
(document # 89) is DENIED.
2. The Clerk is directed to send copies of this Order to the pro se Plaintiff, to defense
counsel, and to the Honorable Robert J. Conrad, Jr.
Case 3:17-cv-00638-RJC-DSC Document 91 Filed 05/09/22 Page 1 of 2
Signed: May 9, 2022
Case 3:17-cv-00638-RJC-DSC Document 91 Filed 05/09/22 Page 2 of 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?