ASHLEY v. WELLMAKER

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA MACON DIVISION

JUSTIN SINCLAIR ASHLEY, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:22-cv-214 (MTT) ) WELLMAKER, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) __________________ )

ORDER Plaintiff Justin Ashley, proceeding pro se, moves for the appointment of counsel. Docs. 49; 52. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1), “[t]he court may request an attorney to represent any person unable to afford counsel.” Nevertheless, “[a]ppointment of counsel in a civil case is not a constitutional right.” Wahl v. McIver, 773 F.2d 1169, 1174 (11th Cir. 1985). Rather, “it is a privilege that is justified only by exceptional circumstances.” Id. Because Ashley’s claims do not present “exceptional circumstances” that would warrant the appointment of counsel, his motions to appoint counsel (Docs. 49; 52) are DENIED. Moreover, pursuant to the Court’s order for pretrial submissions, Ashley is ORDERED to provide to the Court the following by February 15, 2024: • A list of witnesses Ashley wants to call at trial, and • A list of documents Ashley will use at trial.

SO ORDERED, this 26th day of January, 2024. S/ Marc T. Treadwell MARC T. TREADWELL, CHIEF JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT