From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

WALKER v. SUNTRUST BANK OF THOMASVILLE, GA

United States District Court, M.D. Georgia, Valdosta Division
Dec 28, 2007
Civil Action No. 7:07-cv-173 (HL) (M.D. Ga. Dec. 28, 2007)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 7:07-cv-173 (HL).

December 28, 2007


ORDER


Before the Court is Plaintiff's motion to appoint counsel (Doc. 54). Civil litigants do not have an absolute constitutional right to the appointment of counsel. Poole v. Lambert, 819 F.2d 1025, 1028 (11th Cir. 1987). Instead, the appointment of counsel in a civil case is "a privilege that is justified only by exceptional circumstances, such as where the facts and legal issues are so novel or complex as to require the assistance of a trained practitioner." Id. (emphasis added). Here, there are not any exceptional circumstances that justify the appointment of counsel for Plaintiff. As a result, Plaintiff's motion to appoint counsel is denied.

SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

WALKER v. SUNTRUST BANK OF THOMASVILLE, GA

United States District Court, M.D. Georgia, Valdosta Division
Dec 28, 2007
Civil Action No. 7:07-cv-173 (HL) (M.D. Ga. Dec. 28, 2007)
Case details for

WALKER v. SUNTRUST BANK OF THOMASVILLE, GA

Case Details

Full title:TOM WALKER III, Plaintiff, v. SUNTRUST BANK OF THOMASVILLE, GA, et al…

Court:United States District Court, M.D. Georgia, Valdosta Division

Date published: Dec 28, 2007

Citations

Civil Action No. 7:07-cv-173 (HL) (M.D. Ga. Dec. 28, 2007)