From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

McNeely v. Krogers

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
Jun 25, 2012
Case Number 12-12608 (E.D. Mich. Jun. 25, 2012)

Opinion

Case Number 12-12608

06-25-2012

TANYA McNEELY, Plaintiff, v. KROGERS, Defendant.


Honorable David M. Lawson


ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL

The matter is before the Court on the plaintiff's m otion for appointm ent of counsel. "'[A]ppointment of counsel in a civil case is . . . a matter within the discretion of the court. It is a privilege not a right.'" Childs v. Pellegrin, 822 F.2d 1382, 1384 (6th Cir. 1987) (quoting U.S. v. Madden, 352 F.2d 792, 793 (9th Cir. 1965)). The plaintiff has failed to present convincing reasons as to why this Court should exercise its discretionary power at this time.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the plaintiff's application for appointment of counsel [dkt #3] is DENIED.

______________

DAVID M. LAWSON

United States District Judge

PROOF OF SERVICE I

The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing order was served upon each attorney or party of record herein by electronic means or first class U.S. mail on June 25, 2012

______________

DEBORAH R. TOFIL


Summaries of

McNeely v. Krogers

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
Jun 25, 2012
Case Number 12-12608 (E.D. Mich. Jun. 25, 2012)
Case details for

McNeely v. Krogers

Case Details

Full title:TANYA McNEELY, Plaintiff, v. KROGERS, Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

Date published: Jun 25, 2012

Citations

Case Number 12-12608 (E.D. Mich. Jun. 25, 2012)