Harbison v. Thompson

Filing 51

ORDER: The plaintiffs objection 47 is OVERRULED. Signed by District Judge Aleta A. Trauger on 6/11/14. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(dt)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
NASHVILLE DIVISION
EDWARD JEROME HARBISON,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Plaintiff,
v.
EVELYN THOMPSON, et al.,
Defendants.

Civil No. 3:14-0409
Judge Trauger
Magistrate Judge Bryant

ORDER
The plaintiff has filed a “Motion in Opposition of Order For Appointment of Counsel”
(Docket No 47), which the court will construe as an objection to the Magistrate Judge’s Order
denying his request for appointment of counsel (Docket No. 44). Because this ruling is upon a
non-dispositive matter, this court may only modify or set aside the Magistrate Judge’s ruling if it
is found to be clearly erroneous or contrary to law. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A) and Rule 72(a),
FED. R. CIV. P.
The court does not find that the Magistrate Judge’s denial of appointed counsel to Mr.
Harbison is clearly erroneous or contrary to law, particularly where Mr. Harbison has been
functioning as a “legal assistant” to other prisoners at the facility where he is housed. Mr.
Harbison will be at an advantage in representing himself in this case, as he has been attempting
to function as counsel for other inmates.
The plaintiff’s objection is OVERRULED.
It is so ORDERED.
Enter this 11th day of June 2014.
___________________________________
ALETA A. TRAUGER
United States District Judge