From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cieniawa v. White

United States District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania
Dec 8, 2009
CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:09-CV-2130 (M.D. Pa. Dec. 8, 2009)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:09-CV-2130.

December 8, 2009


ORDER


AND NOW, this 8th day of December, 2009, upon consideration of plaintiff's request for appointment of counsel (Doc. 12), and it appearing that, at this juncture of the litigation, that plaintiff is capable of proceeding on his own and that review of the claims reveals that they implicate neither complex legal or factual issues nor require factual investigation or the testimony of expert witnesses, see Tabron v. Grace, 6 F.3d 147, 155-57 (3d Cir. 1993) (listing factors relevant to request for counsel), it is hereby ORDERED that plaintiff's motion (Doc. 12) is DENIED. If further proceedings demonstrate the need for counsel, the matter will be reconsidered either sua sponte or upon motion of plaintiff. See id.


Summaries of

Cieniawa v. White

United States District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania
Dec 8, 2009
CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:09-CV-2130 (M.D. Pa. Dec. 8, 2009)
Case details for

Cieniawa v. White

Case Details

Full title:JASON CIENIAWA, Plaintiff v. DR. DENTIST DAVID WHITE, et al., Defendants

Court:United States District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania

Date published: Dec 8, 2009

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:09-CV-2130 (M.D. Pa. Dec. 8, 2009)