LaKemper v. Solomon et al
Filing
121
ORDER denying 119 Motion Asking Trial Court to Identify Whether NCPLS was Contacted. Signed by Chief Judge Martin Reidinger on 8/4/2020. (Pro se litigant served by US Mail.)(nvc)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
STATESVILLE DIVISION
CIVIL CASE NO. 5:17-cv-00073-MR
COBEY LaKEMPER,
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
GEORGE T. SOLOMON, et al., )
)
Defendants.
)
___________________________ )
ORDER
THIS MATTER is before the Court on the Plaintiff’s “Motion Asking
Trial Court to Identify Whether NCPLS was Contacted While Conducting Its
‘Inquiry’ into ‘Appointing Counsel for Plaintiff’ Prior to Overturning Order of
Whitney Court” [Doc. 119].
On June 9, 2020, the Court entered an Order noting that the Court has
been unable to find an attorney willing to undertake representing the Plaintiff
and therefore requiring the Plaintiff to proceed to trial pro se. The Plaintiff
sought reconsideration of the decision not to appoint him counsel [Doc. 116],
which the Court denied [Doc. 117]. The Plaintiff now asks the Court to advise
him whether North Carolina Prisoner Legal Services (NCPLS) was contacted
about representing the Plaintiff. [Doc. 119].
Case 5:17-cv-00073-MR-WCM Document 121 Filed 08/04/20 Page 1 of 2
The Court denies the Plaintiff’s request. The Plaintiff is not entitled to
compel the Court to disclose its communications with attorneys regarding
potential appointments. Moreover, as the Court previously noted, there is no
absolute right to the appointment of counsel in civil actions such as this one,
and the Plaintiff’s case does not present “exceptional circumstances”
warranting the appointment of counsel.
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that the Plaintiff’s “Motion Asking Trial
Court to Identify Whether NCPLS was Contacted While Conducting Its
‘Inquiry’ into ‘Appointing Counsel for Plaintiff’ Prior to Overturning Order of
Whitney Court” [Doc. 119] is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Signed: August 4, 2020
2
Case 5:17-cv-00073-MR-WCM Document 121 Filed 08/04/20 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?