CURRY v. SELLARS

Opinion

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

FRED DALTON BROOKS, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:17-cv-424 (MTT) ) COMMISSIONER HOMER BRYSON, ) et al., ) ) Defendants. ) __________________ )

ORDER Plaintiff Fred Dalton Brooks objects to the Magistrate Judge’s order denying his motion for counsel and moves for reconsideration of that order. Doc. 144. In his objection, Brooks argues that the Magistrate Judge’s conclusion that appointment of counsel was not justified by “exceptional circumstances” is erroneous or, in the alternative, that the “exceptional circumstances” requirement is inconsistent with the legislative history of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d). Id. at 2-3. The Court “may reconsider any pretrial matter [decided by the Magistrate Judge] . . . where it has been shown that the [M]agistrate [J]udge's order is clearly erroneous or contrary to law.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A); see Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a); Brown v. United States, 748 F.3d 1045, 1055 (11th Cir. 2014). After considering Brooks’s objections, the Court finds that they lack merit. Accordingly, his motion for reconsideration (Doc. 144) is DENIED. SO ORDERED, this 4th day of June, 2020. S/ Marc T. Treadwell MARC T. TREADWELL, JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT