Maday v. Dooley et al

Filing 11

ORDER denying 5 Motion to Appoint Counsel. Signed by US Magistrate Judge Veronica L. Duffy on 1/22/2018. (CG)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF SOUTH DAKOTA
SOUTHERN DIVISION
STANLEY J. MADAY,

4:17-CV-04168-KES

Plaintiff,
vs.
BOB DOOLEY, CHIEF WARDEN AT
MIKE DURFEE STATE PRISON,
INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICIAL CAPACITY;
DENNIS KAEMINGK, SECRETARY OF
THE SOUTH DAKOTA DOC,
INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICIAL CAPACITY;
DR. MARY CARPENTER, DIRECTOR OF
THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH,
INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICIAL CAPACITY;
JENNIFER STANWICK-KLIMEK,
DEPUTY WARDEN AT MIKE DURFEE
STATE PRISON, INDIVIDUAL AND
OFFICIAL CAPACITY; REBECCA
SCHIEFFER, ASSOCIATE WARDEN AT
MIKE DURFEE STATE PRISON,
INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICIAL CAPACITY;
ALEJANDRO REYES, ASSOCIATE
WARDEN AT MIKE DURFEE STATE
PRISON, INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICIAL
CAPACITY; BRENT FLUKE, ASSOCIATE
WARDEN AT MIKE DURFEE STTAE
PRISON, INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICIAL
CAPACITY; JOSH KLIMEK, UNIT
MANAGER AT MIKE DURFEE STATE
PRISON, INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICIAL
CAPACITY; TRAVIS TJEERDSMA, CASE
MANAGER AT MIKE DURFEE STATE
PRISON, INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICIAL
CAPACITY; TAMMY DEJONG, CASE
MANAGER AT MIKE DURFEE STATE
PRISON, INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICIAL
CAPACITY; PA MICHAEL JOE HANVEY,
MEDICAL PROVIDER AT MIKE
DURFEE STATE PRISON, INDIVIDUAL
AND OFFICIAL CAPACITY; PA BRAD
ADAMS, MEDICAL PROVIDER AT MIKE
DURFEE STATE PRISON, INDIVIDUAL
AND OFFICIAL CAPACITY; DR.

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO
APPOINT COUNSEL
(DOCKET NO. 5)

STEPHAN SCHROEDER, MEDICAL
PROVIDER AT MIKE DURFEE STATE
PRISON, INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICIAL
CAPACITY; MISTY TOLSMA-HANVEY,
NURSING SUPERVISOR, AT MIKE
DURFEE STATE PRISON INDIVIDUAL
AND OFFICIAL CAPACITY; LINDSEY
RABBASS, NURSE AT MIKE DURFEE
STATE PRISON, INDIVIDUAL AND
OFFICIAL CAPACITY; ROBIN MYER,
NURSE AT MIKE DURFEE STATE
PRISON, INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICIAL
CAPACITY; CANDICE FEJFAR, NURSE
AT MIKE DURFEE STATE PRISON,
INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICIAL CAPACITY;
DAYNA KLAWITTER, NURSE AT MIKE
DURFEE STATE PRISON, INDIVIDUAL
AND OFFICIAL CAPACITY; DENNIS
CROPPER, CORRECTIONAL OFFICER
AT MIKE DURFEE STATE PRISON,
INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICIAL CAPACITY;
THOMAS HUITEMA, CORRECTIONAL
OFFICER AT MIKE DURFEE STATE
PRISON, INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICIAL
CAPACITY; MICHAEL MEYER,
CORRECTIONAL OFFICER AT MIKE
DURFEE STATE PRISON, INDIVIDUAL
AND OFFICIAL CAPACITY; LORI
STRATMAN, CORRECTIONAL OFFICER
AT MIKE DURFEE STATE PRISON,
INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICIAL CAPACITY;
MIKE GROSSHUESCH,
CORRECTIONAL OFFICER AT MIKE
DURFEE STATE PRISON, INDIVIDUAL
AND OFFICIAL CAPACITY; NICOLE ST.
PIERRE, CORRECTIONAL OFFICER AT
MIKE DURFEE STATE PRISON,
INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICIAL CAPACITY;
MURIEL NAMMINGA, LAUNDRY
SUPERVISOR AT MIKE DURFEE STATE
PRISON, INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICIAL
CAPACITY; CATHERINE SCHLIMGEN,
LEGAL COUNSEL FOR THE SOUTH
DAKOTA DOC, INDIVDUAL AND
OFFICIAL CAPACITY; UNKNOWN CBM
FOOD SERVICES EMPLOYEES,
2

INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICIAL
CAPACITIES; UNKNOWN SOUTH
DAKOTA DOC EMPLOYEES,
INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICIAL
CAPACITES; UNKNOWN SOUTH
DAKOTA DOH EMPLOYEES,
INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICIAL
CAPACITIES; JON E. LITSCHER,
SECRETARY OF THE WISCONSIN
DOC, INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICIAL
CAPACITY; KATHARINE A. ARISS,
ASSISTANT LEGAL COUNSEL FOR THE
WISCONSIN DOC, INDIVIDUAL AND
OFFICIAL CAPACITY; THOMAS P.
MALONEY, LIBRARY SERVICES AND
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY
COORDINATOR FOR THE WISCONSIN
DOC, INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICIAL
CAPACITY; UNKNOWN WISCONSIN
DOC EMPLOYEES, INDIVIDUAL AND
OFFICIAL CAPACITIES; AND CBM
FOOD SERVICES, MEAL AND
COMMISSARY PROVIDER FOR THE
SOUTH DAKOTA DOC, OFFICIAL
CAPACITY;
Defendants.
Plaintiff has filed a motion requesting that the court appoint someone
trained in the law to represent him. (Doc. 5). "Indigent civil litigants do not
have a constitutional or statutory right to appointed counsel." Edgington v.
Missouri Dep't of Corrections, 52 F.3d 777, 780 (8th Cir. 1995). The factors
relevant to evaluating a request for appointment of counsel include "whether
both the plaintiff and the court will benefit from the appointment of counsel,
taking into account the factual and legal complexity of the case, the presence
or absence of conflicting testimony, and the plaintiff's ability to investigate the
facts and present his claim." Davis v. Scott, 94 F.3d 444, 447 (8th Cir. 1996).
3

This case is not factually complex. Plaintiff alleges defendants have been
deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs, have violated his First
Amendment right of free speech, have denied him access to the courts, have
retaliated against him, and have violated his rights under the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
This case is not legally complex. The law regarding plaintiff's claims is
well-settled and is described in more detail in the order for service entered this
same date.
Like all individuals untrained in the law, plaintiff may benefit from the
assistance of counsel, but the court does not find it necessary to appoint
counsel in this matter. The court would not benefit from the assistance of
counsel at this point in the proceedings. Plaintiff, although incarcerated, is
able to investigate the facts of his claim. It is not clear at the present time
whether there will be conflicting testimony in this case. The legal issues
involved do not appear to be legally complex at this point in the proceedings.
Considering all the relevant factors, as discussed above, and upon the record
to date, it is hereby
ORDERED that plaintiff's motion for appointment of counsel (Doc. 5) is
denied without prejudice.
DATED this 22nd day of January, 2018.
BY THE COURT:

VERONICA L. DUFFY
United States Magistrate Judge
4