Turner v. Tillman

E.D. Missouri

Turner v. Tillman

DecidedApril 1, 2020

Docket1:19-cv-00004

StatusUnknown

This text of Turner v. Tillman (Turner v. Tillman) 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

Turner v. Tillman, (E.D. Mo. 2020).

Pincite

Opinion

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI SOUTHEASTERN DIVISION

ALAN D. TURNER, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) No. 1:19-CV-00004-HEA ) UNKNOWN TILLMAN, et al., ) ) Defendants. )

OPINION, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion for Appointment of Counsel [Doc. No. 51 and 55]. The motions will be denied, without prejudice at this time. There is no constitutional or statutory right to appointed counsel in civil cases. Nelson v. Redfield Lithograph Printing, 728 F.2d 1003, 1004 (8th Cir. 1984). In determining whether to appoint counsel, the Court considers several factors, including (1) whether the plaintiff has presented non-frivolous allegations supporting his or her prayer for relief; (2) whether the plaintiff will substantially benefit from the appointment of counsel; (3) whether there is a need to further investigate and present the facts related to the plaintiff’s allegations; and (4) whether the factual and legal issues presented by the action are complex. See Johnson v. Williams, 788 F.2d 1319, 1322–23 (8th Cir. 1986); Nelson, 728 F.2d at 1005. After considering these factors, the Court finds that the appointment of counsel is not warranted at this time. This case is neither factually nor legally complex. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motions for Appointment of Counsel [Doc. No. 51 and 55], are denied without prejudice. Dated this Ist day of April, 2020.

: 3 ——

HENRY EDWARD AUTREY UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI SOUTHEASTERN DIVISION

ALAN D. TURNER, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) No. 1:19-CV-00004-HEA ) UNKNOWN TILLMAN, et al., ) ) Defendants. )

OPINION, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion for Appointment of Counsel [Doc. No. 51 and 55]. The motions will be denied, without prejudice at this time. There is no constitutional or statutory right to appointed counsel in civil cases. Nelson v. Redfield Lithograph Printing, 728 F.2d 1003, 1004 (8th Cir. 1984). In determining whether to appoint counsel, the Court considers several factors, including (1) whether the plaintiff has presented non-frivolous allegations supporting his or her prayer for relief; (2) whether the plaintiff will substantially benefit from the appointment of counsel; (3) whether there is a need to further investigate and present the facts related to the plaintiff’s allegations; and (4) whether the factual and legal issues presented by the action are complex. See Johnson v. Williams, 788 F.2d 1319, 1322–23 (8th Cir. 1986); Nelson, 728 F.2d at 1005. After considering these factors, the Court finds that the appointment of counsel is not warranted at this time. This case is neither factually nor legally complex. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motions for Appointment of Counsel [Doc. No. 51 and 55], are denied without prejudice. Dated this Ist day of April, 2020.

: 3 ——

HENRY EDWARD AUTREY UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Turner v. Tillman, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/turner-v-tillman-moed-2020.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack