Sanders v. Dobbs

E.D. Missouri

Sanders v. Dobbs

DecidedMarch 21, 2024

Docket1:21-cv-00117

StatusUnknown

This text of Sanders v. Dobbs (Sanders v. Dobbs) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. Missouri primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Sanders v. Dobbs, (E.D. Mo. 2024).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION DONALD W. SANDERS ) Plaintiff, Vv. ) Case No. 1:21-cv-00117-SEP MARK DOBBS, et al., Defendants. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Before the Court are Plaintiff Donald W. Sanders’s second and third Motions to Appoint Counsel, Docs. [44], [59]. For the reasons set forth below, the motions are denied. LEGAL STANDARD In civil cases, a self-represented litigant does not have a constitutional or statutory right to appointed counsel. See Patterson v. Kelley, 902 F.3d 845, 850 (8th Cir. 2018) (citing Phillips v. Jasper Cnty. Jail, 437 F.3d 791, 794 (8th Cir. 2006)). A district court may appoint counsel in a civil case if the court is “convinced that an indigent plaintiff has stated a non-frivolous claim .. . and where the nature of the litigation is such that plaintiff as well as the court will benefit from the assistance of counsel.” /d. (citing Johnson v. Williams, 788 F.2d 1219, 1322 (8th Cir. 1986). When determining whether to appoint counsel for an indigent litigant, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit has instructed courts to consider the complexity of the case, the ability of the self-represented litigant to investigate the facts, the existence of conflicting testimony, and the ability of the self-represented litigant to present his or her claim. /d. (citing Phillips, 437 F.3d at 794). Plaintiff has not shown that he cannot adequately present his claims to the Court. Additionally, nothing in his motion or the record before the Court indicates that the factual or legal issues in this prisoner civil rights action are sufficiently complex to justify the appointment of counsel in this matter. Thus, the Court will deny the motions without prejudice at this time. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motions to Appoint Counsel, Docs. [44], [59] are DENIED without prejudice. Dated this 21st day of March, 2024. 4 Le TL L Mig SARAH E. PITLYK UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION DONALD W. SANDERS ) Plaintiff, Vv. ) Case No. 1:21-cv-00117-SEP MARK DOBBS, et al., Defendants. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Before the Court are Plaintiff Donald W. Sanders’s second and third Motions to Appoint Counsel, Docs. [44], [59]. For the reasons set forth below, the motions are denied. LEGAL STANDARD In civil cases, a self-represented litigant does not have a constitutional or statutory right to appointed counsel. See Patterson v. Kelley, 902 F.3d 845, 850 (8th Cir. 2018) (citing Phillips v. Jasper Cnty. Jail, 437 F.3d 791, 794 (8th Cir. 2006)). A district court may appoint counsel in a civil case if the court is “convinced that an indigent plaintiff has stated a non-frivolous claim .. . and where the nature of the litigation is such that plaintiff as well as the court will benefit from the assistance of counsel.” /d. (citing Johnson v. Williams, 788 F.2d 1219, 1322 (8th Cir. 1986). When determining whether to appoint counsel for an indigent litigant, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit has instructed courts to consider the complexity of the case, the ability of the self-represented litigant to investigate the facts, the existence of conflicting testimony, and the ability of the self-represented litigant to present his or her claim. /d. (citing Phillips, 437 F.3d at 794). Plaintiff has not shown that he cannot adequately present his claims to the Court. Additionally, nothing in his motion or the record before the Court indicates that the factual or legal issues in this prisoner civil rights action are sufficiently complex to justify the appointment of counsel in this matter. Thus, the Court will deny the motions without prejudice at this time. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motions to Appoint Counsel, Docs. [44], [59] are DENIED without prejudice. Dated this 21st day of March, 2024. 4 Le TL L Mig SARAH E. PITLYK UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Sanders v. Dobbs, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sanders-v-dobbs-moed-2024.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack