Filed: May 19, 2016
Latest Update: May 19, 2016
Summary: ORDER R. STEVEN WHALEN , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiff Parrish Redd, having filed a pro se civil complaint, now moves for appointment of pro bono counsel [Doc. #76]. Unlike criminal cases, there is no constitutional or statutory right to the appointment of counsel in civil cases. Rather, the Court requests members of the bar to assist in appropriate cases. In Lavado v. Keohane, 992 F.2d 601 , 605-606 (6 th Cir. 1993), the Sixth Circuit noted that "[a]ppointment of counsel in a civil
Summary: ORDER R. STEVEN WHALEN , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiff Parrish Redd, having filed a pro se civil complaint, now moves for appointment of pro bono counsel [Doc. #76]. Unlike criminal cases, there is no constitutional or statutory right to the appointment of counsel in civil cases. Rather, the Court requests members of the bar to assist in appropriate cases. In Lavado v. Keohane, 992 F.2d 601 , 605-606 (6 th Cir. 1993), the Sixth Circuit noted that "[a]ppointment of counsel in a civil ..
More
ORDER
R. STEVEN WHALEN, Magistrate Judge.
Plaintiff Parrish Redd, having filed a pro se civil complaint, now moves for appointment of pro bono counsel [Doc. #76].
Unlike criminal cases, there is no constitutional or statutory right to the appointment of counsel in civil cases. Rather, the Court requests members of the bar to assist in appropriate cases. In Lavado v. Keohane, 992 F.2d 601, 605-606 (6th Cir. 1993), the Sixth Circuit noted that "[a]ppointment of counsel in a civil case is not a constitutional right. It is a privilege that is justified only by exceptional circumstances." (Internal quotations and citations omitted).
It is the practice of this Court to defer any attempt to obtain counsel for pro se civil Plaintiffs until after motions to dismiss or motions for summary judgment have been denied. Under this Court's scheduling order, motions to dismiss under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(c) are not due until June 20, 2016, and motions for summary judgment are not due until January 6, 2017. At this point, Plaintiff's motion to appoint counsel is premature. If Plaintiff's claims ultimately survive dispositive motions, he may renew his motion for appointment of counsel at that time.
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion for appointment of counsel [Docket #76] is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
