Boyd v. Fandeli International Corporation et al
Filing
14
ORDER entered DENYING the plaintiff's request for appointment of counsel. (Signed by Judge Lee H Rosenthal) Parties notified.(leddins, 4)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
HOUSTON DIVISION
JIMMY BOYD,
Plaintiff,
VS.
FANDELI INTERNATIONAL
CORPORATION, et al.,
Defendants.
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
CIVIL ACTION NO. H-14-3006
ORDER
The plaintiff, Jimmy Boyd, filed this pro se suit in October 2014, alleging race
discrimination in employment. He claimed that he was a resident of Harris County, Texas and sued
defendants allegedly located there, asserting that he had worked in the Houston office of the
corporate defendant. Mail sent to the address Mr. Boyd provided the court, 1415 Eldridge Parkway,
Houston, Texas, was returned as undeliverable. The court ordered Mr. Boyd to file a written
statement showing cause why this case should not be dismissed, and he responded. He provided his
proper address, 4522 Hanover Street, Grand Prairie, Texas, 75052. The case will not be dismissed
for failing to provide a place for the court to contact Mr. Boyd.
Mr. Boyd’s motion to appoint him counsel, (Docket Entry No. 13), is denied at this time.
To appoint counsel in Title VII case, a court considers the merits of the plaintiff’s discrimination
claims, the plaintiff’s efforts to obtain counsel, and the plaintiff’s efforts to retain counsel. See, e.g.,
Gonzalez v. Carlin, 907 F.2d 575, 580 (5th Cir. 1990). The current record in this case makes
appointing counsel at least premature. The record is insufficient for this court to make a preliminary
determination about the merits of the plaintiff’s case. There is also inadequate information about
the plaintiff’s efforts to secure counsel. The motion is denied at this time, based on the current
record.
SIGNED on March 23, 2015, at Houston, Texas.
______________________________________
Lee H. Rosenthal
United States District Judge
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?