Nicholson v. Yellen

Full title: JASON NICHOLSON, Plaintiff, v. JANET L. YELLEN, Secretary of the Treasury…

Court: United States District Court, District of Utah

Date published: May 30, 2024

1:24-cv-00090 (D. Utah May. 30, 2024)

Opinion

1:24-cv-00090

05-30-2024

JASON NICHOLSON, Plaintiff, v. JANET L. YELLEN, Secretary of the Treasury, Defendant.

Daphne A. Oberg United States Magistrate Judge

MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL (DOC. NO. 6)

Daphne A. Oberg United States Magistrate Judge

Plaintiff Jason Nicholson filed this action without an attorney and in forma pauperis (without paying the filing fee).¹Mr. Nicholson now moves for appointment of counsel.²Because Mr. Nicholson does not provide a reason for his request, the motion is denied without prejudice.

1 (See Order Granting Mot. to Proceed in Forma Pauperis, Doc. No. 4; Compl., Doc. No. 5.)

2 (Mot. for Appointment of Counsel, Doc. No. 6.)

While defendants in criminal cases have a constitutional right to representation by an attorney,³“[t]here is no constitutional right to appointed counsel in a civil case.”⁴Appointment of counsel in civil cases is left to the court's discretion.⁵Indigent parties in civil cases may apply for the appointment of counsel under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1), which allows a court to “request an attorney to represent any person unable to afford counsel.” The applicant has the burden to convince the court his/her/their claim has enough merit to warrant appointment of counsel.⁶When deciding whether to appoint counsel, the court considers a variety of factors, including “the merits of the litigant's claims, the nature of the factual issues raised in the claims, the litigant's ability to present [the] claims, and the complexity of the legal issues raised by the claims.”⁷

3 See U.S. Const. amend. VI; Fed. R. Crim. P. 44.

4 Durre v. Dempsey, 869 F.2d 543, 547 (10th Cir. 1989).

5 Shabazz v. Askins, 14 F.3d 533, 535 (10th Cir. 1994).

6 McCarthy v. Weinberg, 753 F.2d 836, 838 (10th Cir. 1985).

7 Rucks v. Boergermann, 57 F.3d 978, 979 (10th Cir. 1995) (internal quotation marks omitted).

Mr. Nicholson asks the court to appoint counsel but states no reason or basis for the request, other than that he has been granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis. As outlined above, this is insufficient to warrant appointment of counsel in a civil case. Accordingly, the court DENIES Mr. Nicholson's motion for appointment of counsel⁸without prejudice.⁹

8 (Doc. No. 6.)

9 Because the motion is denied without prejudice, Mr. Nicholson may file a new motion explaining why, under the factors outlined above, his case warrants the appointment of counsel.