Kelly v. K12, Inc., 17-CIV-453-RAW. (2018)
Court: District Court, E.D. Oklahoma
Number: infdco20180205657
Visitors: 8
Filed: Jan. 24, 2018
Latest Update: Jan. 24, 2018
Summary: OPINION AND ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL RONALD A. WHITE , District Judge . Plaintiff Eddie M. Kelly has filed a motion requesting the court to appoint counsel [Docket No. 15]. He bears the burden of convincing the court that his claim has sufficient merit to warrant appointment of counsel. McCarthy v. Weinberg, 753 F.2d 836 , 838 (10th Cir. 1985) (citing United States v. Masters, 484 F.2d 1251 , 1253 (10th Cir. 1973)). The court has carefully reviewed the merits o
Summary: OPINION AND ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL RONALD A. WHITE , District Judge . Plaintiff Eddie M. Kelly has filed a motion requesting the court to appoint counsel [Docket No. 15]. He bears the burden of convincing the court that his claim has sufficient merit to warrant appointment of counsel. McCarthy v. Weinberg, 753 F.2d 836 , 838 (10th Cir. 1985) (citing United States v. Masters, 484 F.2d 1251 , 1253 (10th Cir. 1973)). The court has carefully reviewed the merits of..
More
OPINION AND ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL
RONALD A. WHITE, District Judge.
Plaintiff Eddie M. Kelly has filed a motion requesting the court to appoint counsel [Docket No. 15]. He bears the burden of convincing the court that his claim has sufficient merit to warrant appointment of counsel. McCarthy v. Weinberg, 753 F.2d 836, 838 (10th Cir. 1985) (citing United States v. Masters, 484 F.2d 1251, 1253 (10th Cir. 1973)). The court has carefully reviewed the merits of plaintiff's claims, the nature of factual issues raised in his allegations, and his ability to investigate crucial facts. McCarthy, 753 F.2d at 838 (citing Maclin v. Freake, 650 F.2d 885, 887-88 (7th Cir. 1981)). After considering plaintiff's ability to present his claims and the complexity of the legal issues raised by the claims, the court finds that appointment of counsel is not warranted. See Williams v. Meese, 926 F.2d 994, 996 (10th Cir. 1991); see also Rucks v. Boergermann, 57 F.3d 978, 979 (10th Cir. 1995). ACCORDINGLY, Plaintiff's motion [Docket No. 15] is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
