Filed: Apr. 29, 2019
Latest Update: Apr. 29, 2019
Summary: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER AUDREY G. FLEISSIG , District Judge . This matter is before the Court on the pro se Plaintiff's motion (ECF No. 16) for appointment of counsel. As the Court previously held, "[a] pro se litigant has no statutory or constitutional right to have counsel appointed in a civil case." Stevens v. Redwing, 146 F.3d 538 , 546 (8th Cir. 1998). When determining whether to appoint counsel for an indigent litigant, the Court considers factors such as the complexity of the case,
Summary: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER AUDREY G. FLEISSIG , District Judge . This matter is before the Court on the pro se Plaintiff's motion (ECF No. 16) for appointment of counsel. As the Court previously held, "[a] pro se litigant has no statutory or constitutional right to have counsel appointed in a civil case." Stevens v. Redwing, 146 F.3d 538 , 546 (8th Cir. 1998). When determining whether to appoint counsel for an indigent litigant, the Court considers factors such as the complexity of the case, t..
More
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
AUDREY G. FLEISSIG, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on the pro se Plaintiff's motion (ECF No. 16) for appointment of counsel. As the Court previously held, "[a] pro se litigant has no statutory or constitutional right to have counsel appointed in a civil case." Stevens v. Redwing, 146 F.3d 538, 546 (8th Cir. 1998). When determining whether to appoint counsel for an indigent litigant, the Court considers factors such as the complexity of the case, the litigant's ability to investigate the facts, the existence of conflicting testimony, and the litigant's ability to present his claims. Id. Upon review of the record, the Court does not believe that the appointment of counsel is necessary at this stage of the proceedings. The Court will therefore deny the motion for the appointment of counsel without prejudice, and will entertain future motions for the appointment of counsel, if appropriate, as this litigation progresses.
The Court is also in receipt of Plaintiff's letter (ECF No. 15) to the Clerk of Court, received on April 26, 2019, in which Plaintiff notes his need for medical records and also requests additional time to comply with his disclosure obligations as set forth in Paragraphs 3(A) and 3(B) of the Case Management Order (ECF No. 13). Regarding Plaintiff's request for documents, the Court refers Plaintiff to the Case Management Order, which states that Defendant must, no later than May 16, 2019, allow Plaintiff to inspect and obtain copies of certain documents relevant to Plaintiff's claims, and which further provides that following the initial disclosures of both parties, each party may engage in discovery under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Regarding Plaintiff's request for additional time to comply with his own disclosure obligations, the Court will grant Plaintiff an additional 14 days, until May 30, 2019.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion for appointment of counsel is DENIED without prejudice. ECF No. 16.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff shall have until May 30, 2019 to comply with his initial disclosure obligations as set forth in Paragraphs 3(A) and 3(B) of the Case Management Order.
