Filed: Feb. 10, 2016
Latest Update: Feb. 10, 2016
Summary: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER CYNTHIA REED EDDY , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiff, Michael Kramer ("Plaintiff"), is a pro se state prisoner who has filed this civil rights suit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983 against the following Defendants: the City of New Kensington, the New Kensington Police Department, and its officers Baker, Grillo and Schubert as well as the Arnold Police Department officer William Weber. Plaintiff's Amended Complaint alleges violations of his rights under the Fourth, Eighth and
Summary: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER CYNTHIA REED EDDY , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiff, Michael Kramer ("Plaintiff"), is a pro se state prisoner who has filed this civil rights suit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983 against the following Defendants: the City of New Kensington, the New Kensington Police Department, and its officers Baker, Grillo and Schubert as well as the Arnold Police Department officer William Weber. Plaintiff's Amended Complaint alleges violations of his rights under the Fourth, Eighth and F..
More
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
CYNTHIA REED EDDY, Magistrate Judge.
Plaintiff, Michael Kramer ("Plaintiff"), is a pro se state prisoner who has filed this civil rights suit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the following Defendants: the City of New Kensington, the New Kensington Police Department, and its officers Baker, Grillo and Schubert as well as the Arnold Police Department officer William Weber. Plaintiff's Amended Complaint alleges violations of his rights under the Fourth, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution [ECF No. 39].
On December 3, 2015, Plaintiff filed a motion for appointment of counsel [ECF No. 111], to which the Defendants responded [ECF No. 118] and Plaintiff submitted a reply [ECF No. 122]. Accordingly, the matter is ripe for review.
The Court has previously denied Plaintiff's requests for appointment of counsel [ECF Nos. 7, 51]. However, in light of the procedural posture of this case and the imminence of trial, the Court now finds that appointment of counsel will best serve to move this matter forward and counsel will be appointed for the purpose of trial only.
AND NOW, this 10th day of February, 2016,
IT IS ORDERED that pursuant to 28 U.S.C.§1915(e)(1) and the order of court dated March 24, 1999, entered pursuant to the resolution of the Board of Judges of the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania In re: Funding of Plan for the Appointment of Counsel in Select Pro Se Prisoner Civil Rights Actions (Miscellaneous No. 99-95), the Clerk of Court, on behalf of the Allegheny County Bar Foundation of the Allegheny County Bar Association is directed to request a lawyer to consider entering an appearance on behalf of the plaintiff in the above-captioned case for the purpose of trial only;
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court is directed to provide counsel with a copy of the most current complaint and answers and shall provide counsel with any additional pleadings or documents as requested by counsel;
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that during the time the Court attempts to find counsel, this case will not be stayed. Plaintiff shall move forward with the discovery he seeks and permitted by the Court while the Court seeks appointment of trial counsel.
