From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Heleva v. Kramer

United States District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania
Apr 9, 2007
CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:05-CV-1139 (M.D. Pa. Apr. 9, 2007)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:05-CV-1139.

April 9, 2007


ORDER


AND NOW, this 9th day of April 2007, upon consideration of plaintiff's motion for appointment of counsel (Doc. 48), and it appearing that plaintiff is capable of properly and forcefully prosecuting his claims with adequate factual investigation and appropriate citations to governing authority (Docs. 1, 25, 26, 49), and that resolution of the merits of plaintiff's claims neither implicates complex legal or factual issues nor requires factual investigation or the testimony of expert witnesses, see Montgomery v. Pinchak, 294 F. 3d 492, 499 (3d Cir. 2002) 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 the motion (Doc. 48) 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

Heleva v. Kramer

United States District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania
Apr 9, 2007
CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:05-CV-1139 (M.D. Pa. Apr. 9, 2007)
Case details for

Heleva v. Kramer

Case Details

Full title:DANIEL A. HELEVA, Plaintiff v. SGT. JOSEPH KRAMER, et al., Defendants

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

Date published: Apr 9, 2007

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:05-CV-1139 (M.D. Pa. Apr. 9, 2007)