PRICE v. PHILLIPS

M.D. Georgia

PRICE v. PHILLIPS

District Court, M.D. Georgia·Decided April 10, 2023·No. 5:22-cv-00180·Unknown

Opinion

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

DELLWAYNE PRICE, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:22-CV-180 (MTT) ) Sergeant PHILLIPS, et al ) ) ) Defendants. ) __________________ )

ORDER On May 10, 2022, Plaintiff Dellwayne Price filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim alleging the defendants violated his Eighth Amendment rights. Doc. 1. On March 29, 2023, the Court held a pretrial conference discussing this case and Price’s two other pending cases. Doc. 23. The Court notified the parties that while Price’s two other pending cases would be set for trial in April 2023, this case would most likely not be placed on the trial calendar until late 2023 or early 2024. Id.; Price v. Ivey, No. 5:21-cv- 97-MTT-CHW, Doc. 32 (M.D. Ga. Mar. 29, 2023); Price v. Lamar, No. 5:21-cv-179- MTT-CHW, Doc. 28 (M.D. Ga. Mar. 29, 2023). The Court also explained basic trial procedure and discussed the witnesses and evidence Price would present. Doc. 23. Now Price moves to continue to conduct legal research and investigate facts to support his claims. Doc. 25. But this case has not been placed on the Court’s trial calendar and Price was informed that this case would most likely not go to trial until late 2023 or early 2024. Doc. 23. As a result, a continuance is premature. Accordingly, Price’s motion to continue (Doc. 38) is DENIED. Additionally, Price requests that the Court appoint counsel to assist him with his case. Doc. 24. The Court previously denied Price’s request for counsel. Doc. 15. The Court explained that “[n]o right to counsel exists in civil rights actions.” Id. at 1 (citing Wahl v. McIver, 773 F.2d 1169, 1174 (11th Cir. 1985)). Because Price has set forth the

essential factual allegations underlying his claims, and the applicable legal doctrines are readily apparent, counsel is not necessary. Accordingly, Price’s motion to appoint counsel (Doc. 24) is DENIED. SO ORDERED, this 10th day of April, 2023. S/ Marc T. Treadwell MARC T. TREADWELL, CHIEF JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

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

DELLWAYNE PRICE, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:22-CV-180 (MTT) ) Sergeant PHILLIPS, et al ) ) ) Defendants. ) __________________ )

ORDER On May 10, 2022, Plaintiff Dellwayne Price filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim alleging the defendants violated his Eighth Amendment rights. Doc. 1. On March 29, 2023, the Court held a pretrial conference discussing this case and Price’s two other pending cases. Doc. 23. The Court notified the parties that while Price’s two other pending cases would be set for trial in April 2023, this case would most likely not be placed on the trial calendar until late 2023 or early 2024. Id.; Price v. Ivey, No. 5:21-cv- 97-MTT-CHW, Doc. 32 (M.D. Ga. Mar. 29, 2023); Price v. Lamar, No. 5:21-cv-179- MTT-CHW, Doc. 28 (M.D. Ga. Mar. 29, 2023). The Court also explained basic trial procedure and discussed the witnesses and evidence Price would present. Doc. 23. Now Price moves to continue to conduct legal research and investigate facts to support his claims. Doc. 25. But this case has not been placed on the Court’s trial calendar and Price was informed that this case would most likely not go to trial until late 2023 or early 2024. Doc. 23. As a result, a continuance is premature. Accordingly, Price’s motion to continue (Doc. 38) is DENIED. Additionally, Price requests that the Court appoint counsel to assist him with his case. Doc. 24. The Court previously denied Price’s request for counsel. Doc. 15. The Court explained that “[n]o right to counsel exists in civil rights actions.” Id. at 1 (citing Wahl v. McIver, 773 F.2d 1169, 1174 (11th Cir. 1985)). Because Price has set forth the

essential factual allegations underlying his claims, and the applicable legal doctrines are readily apparent, counsel is not necessary. Accordingly, Price’s motion to appoint counsel (Doc. 24) is DENIED. SO ORDERED, this 10th day of April, 2023. S/ Marc T. Treadwell MARC T. TREADWELL, CHIEF JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

PRICE v. PHILLIPS, (M.D. Ga. 2023).

Pincite

PRICE v. PHILLIPS (PRICE v. PHILLIPS) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related