From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Diaconu v. Defense Logistics

United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Jun 27, 2007
CIVIL ACTION No. 98-6533 (E.D. Pa. Jun. 27, 2007)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION No. 98-6533.

June 27, 2007


MEMORANDUM/ORDER


Currently before the court is pro se plaintiff Dorothy Butler's motion for appointment of counsel in her toxic tort suit. Docket # 64. There is no constitutional or statutory right to counsel in a civil case. See e.g., Parham v. Johnson, 126 F.3d 454, 456-57 (3d Cir. 1997) (listing cases). However, this court does have discretion to "request an attorney to represent any person unable to afford counsel." 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1); see also Parham, 126 F.3d at 457 (noting that appointment of counsel pursuant to § 1915(e)(1) is "discretionary").

Here, Butler has not alleged that she is "unable to afford counsel." Rather, she moves the court to "assign [her] an environmental lawyer on the ground that [she is] not a lawyer, . . . [has] a limited general education[,] and . . . [is] not familiar with the court's procedures and requirements." Docket # 64. Because her motion does not suggest that Butler is "unable to afford counsel," 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1), this court is without authority to appoint an attorney to represent her. A court's discretionary authority to appoint an attorney to represent a litigant only comes into play when a litigant comes within the terms of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e).

It is therefore ORDERED that Butler's motion for appointment of counsel, Docket # 64, is hereby DENIED without prejudice.


Summaries of

Diaconu v. Defense Logistics

United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Jun 27, 2007
CIVIL ACTION No. 98-6533 (E.D. Pa. Jun. 27, 2007)
Case details for

Diaconu v. Defense Logistics

Case Details

Full title:EUFROSINA DIACONU ET AL., PLAINTIFFS, v. DEFENSE LOGISTICS ET AL.…

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

Date published: Jun 27, 2007

Citations

CIVIL ACTION No. 98-6533 (E.D. Pa. Jun. 27, 2007)